Moving someone elses cache

[MysticTutor]

I just read one of the logs for one of my hides and a person with only 19 finds explains in his log he thought it was too difficult to get to so he move it someplace easier to find.

 

It's a 3 terrain. It's not supposed to be easy to get to. Now I have to drove over and put it back. I'm a little PO'd. What's the etiquette here?

[+Isonzo Karst]

If your question was to what to do about the cacher who moved it, I'd say nothing. Nothing you can do now will alter the fact that you get to go take care of your cache. I suppose you could - gently - email them and explain that it's good idea to put the cache back where they found it.

 

Go and put it where it belongs. If at all possible, create a tether for it in the right place. Depending upon circumstances, with or without a 'biner, a way to remove it from the tether. Something that makes it really obvious that cachers are supposed to reattach it to the tether in the place you meant for it to be.

 

Which STILL won't guarantee that someone won't take it down, and leave it down. But it'll help.

[GOF and Bacall]

Remember, we were all beginers at some point. Kindly explain that the intent was for it to be difficult. Offer to answer any questions the new cacher may have. Then repair the cache. It's all part of the cache ownership experience.

[+Mom-n-Andy]

You'd be doing other geocache hiders a service if you sent a note to the finder and explained that the cache was placed intentionally, what the D/T ratings mean, and that finders should not move caches.

[+beejay&esskay]

You might also put a note on the cache page to remind cachers that the terrain 3 is correct and ask them not to move the cache to an easier location.

[+briansnat]

I just read one of the logs for one of my hides and a person with only 19 finds explains in his log he thought it was too difficult to get to so he move it someplace easier to find.

 

It's a 3 terrain. It's not supposed to be easy to get to. Now I have to drove over and put it back. I'm a little PO'd. What's the etiquette here?

 

I think you should be allowed to bop him over the head with a Nerf bat.

[+Touchstone]

This has occasionally happened to my caches, although not with the nice note telling me that they're doing it

 

I tend to look at it from the other side. If someone has managed to make my placement easier, then I've failed to make it idiot proof. I tend to look for ways to discourage this sort of thing within the placement itself.

 

Sounds to me like you need to go back to the drawing board

[Mr.Yuck]

I just read one of the logs for one of my hides and a person with only 19 finds explains in his log he thought it was too difficult to get to so he move it someplace easier to find.

 

It's a 3 terrain. It's not supposed to be easy to get to. Now I have to drove over and put it back. I'm a little PO'd. What's the etiquette here?

 

I think you should be allowed to bop him over the head with a Nerf bat.

 

I prefer the empty 2 liter plastic Pepsi bottle to inflict such punishment. I do it to my kids all the time.

[+Castle Mischief]

I just read one of the logs for one of my hides and a person with only 19 finds explains in his log he thought it was too difficult to get to so he move it someplace easier to find.

 

It's a 3 terrain. It's not supposed to be easy to get to. Now I have to drove over and put it back. I'm a little PO'd. What's the etiquette here?

 

I think you should be allowed to bop him over the head with a Nerf bat.

 

Dude. That's so 1982. Welcome to the new millenia: long swords and battle axes.

 

But, yes, you should be allowed to whomp them upside the head with your choice of Nerf melee weaponry.

[+Wadcutter]

I have a cache rated at 4.5 terrain only because a person needs to figure some way or bring some tool to retrieve it and replace it. Difficulty is only a 2 because it's not handicap accessible. The cache is easily spotted but just not easily retrieved and replaced unless a person comes prepared. I put on the cache page, "NOTE:

It may be easier to retrieve than replace however YOU MUST RETURN THE CACHE TO ITS LOCATION OR YOUR LOG WILL BE DELETED. Finding the cache is easy. The difficult part is retrieving it and returning it to its location."

So what happens? A cacher with 14,000 finds retrieves it but replaces it where the D/T would change from a 2/4.5 to a 1/1. His find was deleted.

The same cacher who couldn't find another of my caches with a Difficulty 4/Terrain 1 put out a "replacement" because he was sure it was gone since he couldn't find it. My original cache was still there and wasn't gone, he just didn't find it. He then claims a find for the replacement that he placed. The replacement he put out would have been a 1/1. I also deleted that "find".

This was no rookie misunderstanding with a claimed 14,000 finds altho it appears to be typical behavior.

[Skippermark]

So what happens? A cacher with 14,000 finds retrieves it but replaces it where the D/T would change from a 2/4.5 to a 1/1.

Ugh. That's frustrating. I've seen similar things happen to caches around here.

[+dfx]

I have a cache rated at 4.5 terrain only because a person needs to figure some way or bring some tool to retrieve it and replace it. Difficulty is only a 2 because it's not handicap accessible.

just as a side note, shouldn't those ratings be the other way around?

[+buttaskotch]

I just read one of the logs for one of my hides and a person with only 19 finds explains in his log he thought it was too difficult to get to so he move it someplace easier to find.

 

It's a 3 terrain. It's not supposed to be easy to get to. Now I have to drove over and put it back. I'm a little PO'd. What's the etiquette here?

 

I think you should be allowed to bop him over the head with a Nerf bat.

Was thinking that, but muchstronger an impliment. <to self> must not hurt newbie cachers, must not hurt newbie cachers,...

[+buttaskotch]

I have a cache rated at 4.5 terrain only because a person needs to figure some way or bring some tool to retrieve it and replace it. Difficulty is only a 2 because it's not handicap accessible. The cache is easily spotted but just not easily retrieved and replaced unless a person comes prepared. I put on the cache page, "NOTE:

It may be easier to retrieve than replace however YOU MUST RETURN THE CACHE TO ITS LOCATION OR YOUR LOG WILL BE DELETED. Finding the cache is easy. The difficult part is retrieving it and returning it to its location."

So what happens? A cacher with 14,000 finds retrieves it but replaces it where the D/T would change from a 2/4.5 to a 1/1. His find was deleted.

The same cacher who couldn't find another of my caches with a Difficulty 4/Terrain 1 put out a "replacement" because he was sure it was gone since he couldn't find it. My original cache was still there and wasn't gone, he just didn't find it. He then claims a find for the replacement that he placed. The replacement he put out would have been a 1/1. I also deleted that "find".

This was no rookie misunderstanding with a claimed 14,000 finds altho it appears to be typical behavior.

Its like some caches that I have seen with string in trees near the cache to let others know its there. I am a numbers runner, but thats just cheating

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

<snip>

I tend to look at it from the other side. If someone has managed to make my placement easier, then I've failed to make it idiot proof. I tend to look for ways to discourage this sort of thing within the placement itself.

 

Sounds to me like you need to go back to the drawing board

We agree! The real problem is finding the idiot to teach you how to make it idiot proof.

[+bflentje]

I have a cache rated at 4.5 terrain only because a person needs to figure some way or bring some tool to retrieve it and replace it. Difficulty is only a 2 because it's not handicap accessible. The cache is easily spotted but just not easily retrieved and replaced unless a person comes prepared. I put on the cache page, "NOTE:

It may be easier to retrieve than replace however YOU MUST RETURN THE CACHE TO ITS LOCATION OR YOUR LOG WILL BE DELETED. Finding the cache is easy. The difficult part is retrieving it and returning it to its location."

So what happens? A cacher with 14,000 finds retrieves it but replaces it where the D/T would change from a 2/4.5 to a 1/1. His find was deleted.

The same cacher who couldn't find another of my caches with a Difficulty 4/Terrain 1 put out a "replacement" because he was sure it was gone since he couldn't find it. My original cache was still there and wasn't gone, he just didn't find it. He then claims a find for the replacement that he placed. The replacement he put out would have been a 1/1. I also deleted that "find".

This was no rookie misunderstanding with a claimed 14,000 finds altho it appears to be typical behavior.

 

While I agree that there are knuckleheads that place caches back as they please, I believe that adding a logging requirement, even if it has to do with admission of rehide guilt, is NOT allowed. I would always rehide your caches the way I found them but if my log was ever deleted because you "thought" you knew how it was rehidden, that'd be one relog attempt and then instant note to Groundspeak.

[+Wadcutter]

I have a cache rated at 4.5 terrain only because a person needs to figure some way or bring some tool to retrieve it and replace it. Difficulty is only a 2 because it's not handicap accessible.

just as a side note, shouldn't those ratings be the other way around?

Not according to the ratings guide. The "terrain" in this cache's situation is what has to be overcome by the use of some kind of tool or other improvised method.

 

While I agree that there are knuckleheads that place caches back as they please, I believe that adding a logging requirement, even if it has to do with admission of rehide guilt, is NOT allowed. I would always rehide your caches the way I found them but if my log was ever deleted because you "thought" you knew how it was rehidden, that'd be one relog attempt and then instant note to Groundspeak.

Not at all. There are a lot of caches, all approved by reviewers, where the D/T involves not only retrieving the cache but also replacing it, ie, climbing a tree, attached to the supports of an old bridge, or as one locally which is about 30 ft up on a light pole. With each of those they're in plain view and can be retrieved with something as simple as a weight on a string tossed over the cache container. Retrieving it is often the easy part. Replacing it is often more difficult. If you can't replace it then leave it until you can. Otherwise the D/T changes.

That's not an additional logging requirement. An additional logging requirement is where you require the person to not only sign your log but then send you an email with a code word or some other unrelated to actually finding and replacing the cache.

[+dfx]

Not according to the ratings guide. The "terrain" in this cache's situation is what has to be overcome by the use of some kind of tool or other improvised method.

well, to my understanding, the terrain rating pertains to the difficulty of getting to GZ - if you need special equipment (boat for example) then it's a terrain 5 - while the "difficulty" pertains to the difficulty of finding/retrieving the cache once you've reached GZ: if you need special tools to open the container, then it's difficulty 5.

 

at least that's what i thought the consensus was, but i've seen other caches which also use a different definition. which is why i wanted to ask.

Edited April 13, 2010 by dfx

[+WRITE SHOP ROBERT]

I just read one of the logs for one of my hides and a person with only 19 finds explains in his log he thought it was too difficult to get to so he move it someplace easier to find.

 

It's a 3 terrain. It's not supposed to be easy to get to. Now I have to drove over and put it back. I'm a little PO'd. What's the etiquette here?

Become friends with them by sending a nice note about some of the etiquette of Geocaching, and welcoming them to the game.

[+bflentje]

snip snip..

 

Not at all. There are a lot of caches, all approved by reviewers, where the D/T involves not only retrieving the cache but also replacing it, ie, climbing a tree, attached to the supports of an old bridge, or as one locally which is about 30 ft up on a light pole. With each of those they're in plain view and can be retrieved with something as simple as a weight on a string tossed over the cache container. Retrieving it is often the easy part. Replacing it is often more difficult. If you can't replace it then leave it until you can. Otherwise the D/T changes.

That's not an additional logging requirement. An additional logging requirement is where you require the person to not only sign your log but then send you an email with a code word or some other unrelated to actually finding and replacing the cache.

 

I understand what you're saying about ratings and completely agree in that aspect. But that does not give you authority to delete logs as you indicated, even with the delete button available to you.

[MysticTutor]

It's gets better. I drove over to the cache this morning to put it back where it belongs only to find out he is putting advertisements for his business in the caches. Where is my wifle ball bat? Bad geocacher.

[+Wadcutter]

well, to my understanding, the terrain rating pertains to the difficulty of getting to GZ - if you need special equipment (boat for example) then it's a terrain 5 - while the "difficulty" pertains to the difficulty of finding/retrieving the cache once you've reached GZ: if you need special tools to open the container, then it's difficulty 5.

 

at least that's what i thought the consensus was, but i've seen other caches which also use a different definition. which is why i wanted to ask.

Using Clayjar's rating system my cache is rated a D1/T5. I bumped the D to a 2 but dropped the T to a 4.5.

Here's Clayjar's chart/grading system. http://www.clayjar.com/gcrs/

 

I understand what you're saying about ratings and completely agree in that aspect. But that does not give you authority to delete logs as you indicated, even with the delete button available to you.

Authority? You're kidding right? What authority do you think a person needs? The cache owner is the authority. He places the cache which sets the requirements for logging the cache. Your "theory" of "additional logging requirement" didn't hold water so now you resort to "authority"? HARHARHAR!!!

It's my cache. I stipulated the requirements just like every other cache owner does when they place a cache. The logging requirements are quite simple. Same with a lot of caches that require a bit more difficulty than lifing a lamp post skirt. If you don't like the requirements set by the cache owner and aren't capable of handling it then skip that cache and stick with lamp post skirts or whatever other ones you like to do.

Think about it. If a 5/5 cache is moved to where it's now handicap accessible and in plain view then it's no longer a 5/5 and not the same cache. Your responsibility as a cache finder is to replace the cache as found. If you can't handle that then don't go for it. Very simple.

Such requirements are not unusual. Plenty of caches out there where the CO states specifically on the cache page the cache has to be returned where found or the find will be deleted. Here's an example: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...c5-82197c49ce76

Edited April 14, 2010 by Wadcutter

[+Ma&PaD]

Moving caches is one of our pet peeves - we figure if people want to take charge of our hides, they need to hide some themselves - when caching, we always place the cache back exactly as we found it - should be a good rule for all cachers -

[+Knight2000]

We have the same problem with our cache Van Halen 2/25/1984, 4 Weeks @ #1. It keeps magically migrating downward so it's easier for the next person to retrieve it. (Or get taken!) I had one person intentionally move it because they thought it was too high. It happens. Just shrug it off. They are all just trying to help.

 

So what happens? A cacher with 14,000 finds retrieves it but replaces it where the D/T would change from a 2/4.5 to a 1/1. His find was deleted.

I saw a log from a cacher with more finds than that leave an "angel cache" for the cache they felt was missing and then log their find. "Aha! I found this in my pocket!"

[+Harry Dolphin]

I understand what you're saying about ratings and completely agree in that aspect. But that does not give you authority to delete logs as you indicated, even with the delete button available to you.

Authority? You're kidding right? What authority do you think a person needs? The cache owner is the authority. He places the cache which sets the requirements for logging the cache. Your "theory" of "additional logging requirement" didn't hold water so now you resort to "authority"? HARHARHAR!!!

It's my cache. I stipulated the requirements just like every other cache owner does when they place a cache. The logging requirements are quite simple.

 

The removal of ALR does not seem to have addressed this problem directly, but the "Getting Started" section does list:

7. Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location.

So, there is a good argument that putting the cache back where one found it coud be considered a requirement.

 

I opt for the nerf-bat solution.

[+ngrrfan]

{snip} but the "Getting Started" section does list:

7. Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location.

So, there is a good argument that putting the cache back where one found it coud be considered a requirement.

So does this mean that if I find a cache on the ground, under a tree, and it has a wire hook on it designed to hold it to a branch that I should put the cache back on the ground even tho I know it should hang from a limb?

[+Crazy Bird]

Last week we came upon a cache and it was directly behind a tombstone next to a tree.....well as we all know we shouldnt put a cache next to or behind a grave. So I moved it....I put it in the tree so it does have the same cords....

[+webscouter.]

{snip} but the "Getting Started" section does list:

7. Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location.

So, there is a good argument that putting the cache back where one found it coud be considered a requirement.

So does this mean that if I find a cache on the ground, under a tree, and it has a wire hook on it designed to hold it to a branch that I should put the cache back on the ground even tho I know it should hang from a limb?

 

Yep, that is what I would do. Then I would send an additional note to the cache owner and let them know I put it back right were I found it.

[+Vater_Araignee]

{snip} but the "Getting Started" section does list:

7. Sign the logbook and return the geocache to its original location.

So, there is a good argument that putting the cache back where one found it coud be considered a requirement.

So does this mean that if I find a cache on the ground, under a tree, and it has a wire hook on it designed to hold it to a branch that I should put the cache back on the ground even tho I know it should hang from a limb?

 

Yep, that is what I would do. Then I would send an additional note to the cache owner and let them know I put it back right were I found it.

Exactly. I don't have the right to determine the CO's intention, only question. Chances are a container from another hide is being rehashed and the CO didn't think an alteration was needed, it may not be likely but it may happen.

[+wolfslady]

Lets be reasonable if the discription or hint says "hanging on a hook on a tree" and the cache is on the ground below the hook then I thinks it's perfectly fine to put it where you are sure it belongs. For that matter if the name of the cache indicates that's where it belongs "Hooked on trees" isn't it just being silly to not place it where it's clear it was supposed to be. However if you are just guessing or being a PIA by moving it as in the OP's case that is another story.

 

There is a cache in our area that I reallly would have liked to have moved, but I didn't. If I'd been 100% sure it wasn't where it belonged I would have done it in a second, but I wasn't. Where my GPS put me fit the discription much better than where I found it did but not so clearly that it would allow me to place it anywhere else, so I settled for giving the cache owner a heads up. But if it was clear it was supposed to have been on that hook 10 feet up a tree and the discripion said you must replace it on the hook, I wouldn't feel right logging it and leaving it on the ground just because the person in front of me was to lazy to do so. If you didn't IMO you are not much better than the person who left it down in the first place. I will agree however if there is a hook on a tree and no way to be sure the cache belonged there you need to leave it where you found it.

[+beejay&esskay]

This is one reason I think cache owners should include, at the top of the cache log, the correct placement of the cache.

 

When I find a "Hooked on trees" cache on the ground, underneath the hook in the tree, do I follow commonsense or the frequent statement in cache descriptions "Please replace as found".

[+Too Tall John]

I just read one of the logs for one of my hides and a person with only 19 finds explains in his log he thought it was too difficult to get to so he move it someplace easier to find.

 

It's a 3 terrain. It's not supposed to be easy to get to. Now I have to drove over and put it back. I'm a little PO'd. What's the etiquette here?

I think you should be allowed to bop him over the head with a Nerf bat.

I prefer the empty 2 liter plastic Pepsi bottle to inflict such punishment. I do it to my kids all the time.

I had heard the preferred object was dead lemmings.

Moving caches is one of our pet peeves - we figure if people want to take charge of our hides, they need to hide some themselves - when caching, we always place the cache back exactly as we found it - should be a good rule for all cachers -

Not only does it help maintain the proper D/T ratings, if the CO goes to check on the cache & can't find it, they might archive it. Read on:

October 21, 2005 by granithead

cache has been removed by person or persons unknown.

May 1, 2007 by Too Tall John

I had heard from cachers I bumped into in the woods that there was a cache near ee cummings' tree house. I was sad to find that it had been archived. I finally decided after reading the cache description to go check the spot out, maybe scout out a new cache location. I'd punched the coords in to help me find the old foundation (not needed, the path took me right to it) but continued following the GPSr 'til I spotted a green corner. THE CACHE! It is still there! It was in great shape for having sat over a year. I wasn't planning on needing swag, so TNLN. (Or so I thought. Got back to the car to see my 1st tick of the year crawling my leg!) Thanks for the (unexpected) cache! What a view!

May 5, 2007 by granithead

i checked the cache today and it is there but it was moved about 6ft from it`s original hiding spot. i put it back where it belonged. cache is in excellent shape. i added a few items. granithead. roch.n.h.

[+teadams]

Moving caches is one of our pet peeves - we figure if people want to take charge of our hides, they need to hide some themselves - when caching, we always place the cache back exactly as we found it - should be a good rule for all cachers -

 

A trail I walk quite often had a Micro place quite near the start and, while I do a few micro's, I never seemed to spot this one as I walked by, even spending a few minutes looking at what my GPS told me was GZ.

One day, while starting off, I got talking with a couple of people in the parking lot and mentioned I was geocaching and working on a multi in the park. They asked if I had found the one right at the start of the trail. With my answer of no, they explained that, while they were not geocachers, they liked moving this micro from one side of the trail to the other every few times they walked the trail! Something they did every day of the week in good weather! No wonder I had problems finding it.

I then explained why they shouldn't do that and even showed them the difference in reading I got from one spot to the other.

I contacted the owner, told him the story and verified I had left it on the correct location.