Log a muggled cache as found?

[+Cool Cow Cachers]

We have just passed 300 finds and today found our second muggled cache. Both were obviously muggled because we found the actual cache contents. The first one we did log as a found cache. It was an extremely time consuming Multi and there was no doubt that what we found were the remains of the cache. We cleaned up the remnants, logged the find and then filed an archive request. The question is, how do others treat these caches? Do you log them as found?

[Delons]

I would...

[+dfx]

if there was something left to find, such as the container or the log book, i usually log a find. if it's just some items that may or may not have come from the cache, then i don't.

 

you logged a "needs archive"??

[+Cool Cow Cachers]

if there was something left to find, such as the container or the log book, i usually log a find. if it's just some items that may or may not have come from the cache, then i don't.

 

you logged a "needs archive"??

 

Yes, I logged both as "Needs Archived" along with plenty of photo evidence from the scene of the crime.

[+J the Goat]

First off, nope. I wouldn't log it as I didn't find it.

 

Second, maybe a needs maintainence would have been more appropriate. Because the cache needs maintainence.

 

Why do you want the cache to go away instead of getting fixed?

[+dfx]

Yes, I logged both as "Needs Archived" along with plenty of photo evidence from the scene of the crime.

not good. muggled caches can be replaced, you know? it's not necessary to archive the listing right away.

 

archiving only makes sense if the cache has been known to be destroyed for a longer while, with the CO being inactive or unresponsive and not disabling and not replacing the cache. in most other cases, "needs maintenance" is more appropriate.

[sabrefan7]

I looked for the cache you posted an archive request for but did not see it. I think a needs Maintenance request may be in order instead of an archive. What makes you want the cache to be archived? Is the CO refusing to take care of it, or are they no longer active?

[+ngrrfan]

I log a Found.... and then a NM (needs maintenance). One muggling does not mean it should be archived.

[+Harry Dolphin]

If I find the container, which is obviously the container (complete with Geocaching notice), then yes, I will add a piece of paper with my name on it, and log the find.

 

But, I would need to be 100% sure that that was the cache!

 

I did find a match container once, that had been shredded into tiny pieces (and the log as well) by a lawn mower. I did not log that one as a find. NM.

An official Geocaching logsheet, without a container? Yeah. I'd probably log that as well.

But I would need to be 100% sure.

[Mr.Yuck]

First off, nope. I wouldn't log it as I didn't find it.

 

Second, maybe a needs maintainence would have been more appropriate. Because the cache needs maintainence.

 

Why do you want the cache to go away instead of getting fixed?

 

Yeah, put me down for a maintenance request, rather than a needs archived.

 

Oh, the Geo-Police aren't going to come and take you away if log it. But me, I'm a no signee, no findee guy. I found a a lock-n-lock top and a couple pieces of swag last summer. No container or logbook, I said DNF. The deciding factor here would be no container. I have signed sheets of paper and put them in a logbookless cache. I was not offered a find for the linked cache, nor would I have taken it. That's just how I roll though.

Edited November 3, 2010 by Mr.Yuck

[+dfx]

Oh, the Geo-Police aren't going to come and take you away if log it. But me, I'm a no signee, no findee guy. I found a a lock-n-lock top and a couple pieces of swag last summer. No container or logbook, I said DNF. I was not offered a find, nor would I have taken it. That's just how I roll though.

and then there's caches, or rather COs, like http://coord.info/GCP20P

[+J the Goat]

Oh, the Geo-Police aren't going to come and take you away if log it. But me, I'm a no signee, no findee guy. I found a a lock-n-lock top and a couple pieces of swag last summer. No container or logbook, I said DNF. I was not offered a find, nor would I have taken it. That's just how I roll though.

and then there's caches, or rather COs, like http://coord.info/GCP20P

 

At first I thought that was going to be a link to the cache where people were finding a screw in a board and logging the find. Anyone got the link for that one?

[+roziecakes]

I would probably just log the Needs Maintenance log rather than a find, unless the logbook was there to sign; and then wait to see what happens. I can understand why you logged the find on the multi though...

[AZcachemeister]

If I am reasonably sure I found the remains of a cache, I log the find and describe the situation in my log.

 

I DO NOT log a 'N/M' or 'N/A' (unless the owner is a known slacker). I assume the cache owner is at least as smart as me and can read my log describing the situation, and that they will take the appropriate action.

 

If I am the next to find the 'cache' in disrepair and the owner has done nothing, THEN I will log the 'N/M'.

 

Or, if it has been weeks since the first report of a problem with no action by the C/O, I might log a 'N/A'.

[+narcissa]

I would check with the owner out of courtesy.

[Mr.Yuck]

Oh, the Geo-Police aren't going to come and take you away if log it. But me, I'm a no signee, no findee guy. I found a a lock-n-lock top and a couple pieces of swag last summer. No container or logbook, I said DNF. I was not offered a find, nor would I have taken it. That's just how I roll though.

and then there's caches, or rather COs, like http://coord.info/GCP20P

 

Well that's interesting, I could have just signed the lid. Gives a whole new meaning to the acronym "SL", I suppose.

[Dj Storm]

In the past I found:

- [multiple instances] the cache with cracked lid, soggy logbook or other issues; signed log, did as much maintenance as I could, logged "Found it" and eventually NM

- [two times] cache contents (including logbook) scattered around. Put everything back, signed log, logged "Found it"

- cache muggled by bears, container in pieces, logbook out in the open with claw holes, and wet due to rain, laminated stash notes moldy. signed the logbook (as well as an additional piece of paper), put the pieces back, logged "Found it" + NM

- only the logbook, no container or swag. Put the logbook in a ziploc, signed log, logged Found it + NM

 

- only the cache lid with geocaching sticker, logged DNF + NM

- stash note only, logged DNF + NM

- [several times] only the plastic bag in the hiding place, logged DNF + NM

- [many times] the empty hiding place, logged DNF + NM

[+Cedar Grove Seekers]

We have just passed 300 finds and today found our second muggled cache. Both were obviously muggled because we found the actual cache contents. The first one we did log as a found cache. It was an extremely time consuming Multi and there was no doubt that what we found were the remains of the cache. We cleaned up the remnants, logged the find and then filed an archive request. The question is, how do others treat these caches? Do you log them as found?

 

It would depend on the how badly muggled it was. If the entire cache was in place and a muggle merely broke the pencil, then I'd log as a find. If the muggle took everything except for half a broken pencil, then I would not log as a find.

 

It sounds like you are pretty comfortable that you found the cache, so be happy with your find.

[+dfx]

and then there's caches, or rather COs, like http://coord.info/GCP20P

Well that's interesting, I could have just signed the lid. Gives a whole new meaning to the acronym "SL", I suppose.

to their defense: not too long ago, we found a cache that was deliberately placed in exactly that manner: a white lid hanging in a tree and nothing else. not sure if that can still be called a "cache", but hey, found is found

[Mr.Yuck]

and then there's caches, or rather COs, like http://coord.info/GCP20P

Well that's interesting, I could have just signed the lid. Gives a whole new meaning to the acronym "SL", I suppose.

to their defense: not too long ago, we found a cache that was deliberately placed in exactly that manner: a white lid hanging in a tree and nothing else. not sure if that can still be called a "cache", but hey, found is found

 

I see the owner knows it's only a lid, and says to go ahead and sign the lid, until he gets around to replacing it. If he says to do it, I can see people doing it. I do not think this would fly if a reviewer became aware of this arrangement, though.

 

The white lid hanging in the tree too. That's not a container, and therefore not a geocache. We had a new cacher in my area who decided his "cache" was going to be a "Geodisc" on a tree. Nothing to sign, no intention of there being anything to sign. Nope, that didn't last very long once the reviewer became aware of the situation.

[+narcissa]

Oh, the Geo-Police aren't going to come and take you away if log it. But me, I'm a no signee, no findee guy. I found a a lock-n-lock top and a couple pieces of swag last summer. No container or logbook, I said DNF. I was not offered a find, nor would I have taken it. That's just how I roll though.

and then there's caches, or rather COs, like http://coord.info/GCP20P

 

Well that's interesting, I could have just signed the lid. Gives a whole new meaning to the acronym "SL", I suppose.

 

A cacher once signed the back of a gatorade bottle lide, thinking it was the remains of one of Taoiseach's caches.

 

He let the log stand, but ridicules her frequently. I think he even jokingly mentioned it in his log when we found one of her geocaches.

[+dfx]

The white lid hanging in the tree too. That's not a container, and therefore not a geocache. We had a new cacher in my area who decided his "cache" was going to be a "Geodisc" on a tree. Nothing to sign, no intention of there being anything to sign. Nope, that didn't last very long once the reviewer became aware of the situation.

actually i've seen those containerless "geocaches" several times already. in the case of the lid, the lid was clearly marked as geocache and was telling people to sign their names on it. another common example is the fake label on electrical boxes: basically just a large piece of fridge magnet, with real looking numbers on one side and the log on the other. i can't say i didn't enjoy finding them, especially the first one. would be interesting to know what the official reviewer opinion on hides like those is.

[+Nicodemus3]

I've logged a muggled cache a couple times if I could find some remnant of the container or log. I'll always explain the situation in my post though and have never had a CO object.

I once spotted a cache that was literally covered with ants that I was not going to try and open up. I still logged it without signing and notified the CO.

[+DarkZen]

I would like to hear back from CoolCowCachers to understand their reasoning for the NA instead of NM.

I looked for the cache you posted an archive request for but did not see it.

See the last entry on Falling Waters.

[+DarkZen]

No container or logbook, I said DNF. The deciding factor here would be no container

I disagree. If there is a substantial portion of the cache there regardless of what it is, and I can field repair, I'll sign. For example, I frequently carry spare logs and a large freezer baggie. On rare occasions when I find everything but the container, I'll sign the log and put everything in the baggie until the CO can get out to repair it.

 

If I find just the container and I have a replacement or makeshift log, I'll log it. If I don't have a replacement log I DNF.

[+Cool Cow Cachers]

Both of these which I found recently ( Voting is Cool and Falling Waters ) had been ammo can caches and were within close proximity to schools. What I did find were the obvious remains of the caches but the cache containers were gone. Knowing how kids are I'm pretty sure they came across the caches, took what was valuable to them (the ammo cans) and left the rest to rot. There was nothing left to "Maintain" so I CITO the remains and filed them as "Needs Archived".

 

I frequently came across caches that NM. I carry spare cache essentials such as logs, bags and towel to dry them out. I do not hesitate to make field repairs to a cache. If they just "Need Maintenance", I do log them as such. This was the case with Slippery Root Cache, a third muggled cache I found today.

[+popokiiti]

Had to sign a cache once as there was no log sheet - it was a magnetic strip - and sent the owner an email. If there is anything we can physically sign, we'll do so/add paper if needed, log online with a note or a Needs Maintenance.

[Mr.Yuck]

Both of these which I found recently ( Voting is Cool and Falling Waters ) had been ammo can caches and were within close proximity to schools. What I did find were the obvious remains of the caches but the cache containers were gone. Knowing how kids are I'm pretty sure they came across the caches, took what was valuable to them (the ammo cans) and left the rest to rot. There was nothing left to "Maintain" so I CITO the remains and filed them as "Needs Archived".

 

I frequently came across caches that NM. I carry spare cache essentials such as logs, bags and towel to dry them out. I do not hesitate to make field repairs to a cache. If they just "Need Maintenance", I do log them as such. This was the case with Slippery Root Cache, a third muggled cache I found today.

 

No offense, but a cache going missing once doesn't mean it has to be archived for all eternity. People do replace the containters of muggled caches, you know. Like tens of thousands of times since Geocaching started. I've done my part by doing it 3 times, I believe.

 

Which is why the opinions have been totally unanimous for a needs maintenance here. Give the owner a chance to replace their cache, if they so choose.

Edited November 4, 2010 by Mr.Yuck

[Mr.Yuck]

The white lid hanging in the tree too. That's not a container, and therefore not a geocache. We had a new cacher in my area who decided his "cache" was going to be a "Geodisc" on a tree. Nothing to sign, no intention of there being anything to sign. Nope, that didn't last very long once the reviewer became aware of the situation.

actually i've seen those containerless "geocaches" several times already. in the case of the lid, the lid was clearly marked as geocache and was telling people to sign their names on it. another common example is the fake label on electrical boxes: basically just a large piece of fridge magnet, with real looking numbers on one side and the log on the other. i can't say i didn't enjoy finding them, especially the first one. would be interesting to know what the official reviewer opinion on hides like those is.

 

I had heard a rumor that "fridge magnets" with the log on the back were no longer allowed, as they don't constitute a container. Of course the reviewer has no way of knowing what is in place as a container or logsheet. And how do you know I'm not a reviewer, anyways?

[+Sol seaker]

Both of these which I found recently ( Voting is Cool and Falling Waters ) had been ammo can caches and were within close proximity to schools. What I did find were the obvious remains of the caches but the cache containers were gone. Knowing how kids are I'm pretty sure they came across the caches, took what was valuable to them (the ammo cans) and left the rest to rot. There was nothing left to "Maintain" so I CITO the remains and filed them as "Needs Archived".

 

I frequently came across caches that NM. I carry spare cache essentials such as logs, bags and towel to dry them out. I do not hesitate to make field repairs to a cache. If they just "Need Maintenance", I do log them as such. This was the case with Slippery Root Cache, a third muggled cache I found today.

 

The listing is still there and the container can be replaced.

 

Just as everyone else has said, a "Needs Maintenance" is the appropriate response.

[+Cool Cow Cachers]

The listing is still there and the container can be replaced.

 

Just as everyone else has said, a "Needs Maintenance" is the appropriate response.

 

Thank you to everyone who posted appropriate responses to the original question.

 

As so often happens in forums, this quickly diverted from the original question. It took all of 3 posts to get derailed. This is not a NM/NA debate.

[+sbell111]

Both of these which I found recently ( Voting is Cool and Falling Waters ) had been ammo can caches and were within close proximity to schools. What I did find were the obvious remains of the caches but the cache containers were gone. Knowing how kids are I'm pretty sure they came across the caches, took what was valuable to them (the ammo cans) and left the rest to rot. There was nothing left to "Maintain" so I CITO the remains and filed them as "Needs Archived".

 

I frequently came across caches that NM. I carry spare cache essentials such as logs, bags and towel to dry them out. I do not hesitate to make field repairs to a cache. If they just "Need Maintenance", I do log them as such. This was the case with Slippery Root Cache, a third muggled cache I found today.

 

No offense, but a cache going missing once doesn't mean it has to be archived for all eternity. People do replace the containters of muggled caches, you know. Like tens of thousands of times since Geocaching started. I've done my part by doing it 3 times, I believe.

Unless it's an Ape.

[+DarkZen]

As so often happens in forums, this quickly diverted from the original question. It took all of 3 posts to get derailed. This is not a NM/NA debate.

The thread was still on topic as of post 5. I gave a detailed explanation of how I would log (or not). Your refusal in this thread to acknowledge your mistake or to at least consider it contributed to the hijack. Honestly, your last post came off as being pouty about being corrected. It was inappropriate to request archiving for either of the caches as the owners are still active. Further, the Voting Is Cool! cache has been out since 4/6/2002.

 

But as so often happens in forums, the OP digs their heels in and sticks to their own opinion against the good advice of the community.

 

When you get around to hiding some of your own caches you will feel a bit different about this issue.

 

 

ETA:Edited ~spelling

Edited November 4, 2010 by DarkZen

[+dfx]

And how do you know I'm not a reviewer, anyways?

good point. but unless the reply comes from the reviewer so--- err, alternate account, i don't consider it as an official reviewer opinion

Edited November 4, 2010 by dfx

[+Renegade Knight]

... logged the find and then filed an archive request....

 

If I find the cache or it's remains I log a find. What I don't do is call in the big guns and demand it be archived. The owner, being responsible for the cache, and deserving of your respect for putting it out there for your fun deserves to be notified about the problem so thay can fix it.

[GOF and Bacall]

The listing is still there and the container can be replaced.

 

Just as everyone else has said, a "Needs Maintenance" is the appropriate response.

 

Thank you to everyone who posted appropriate responses to the original question.

 

As so often happens in forums, this quickly diverted from the original question. It took all of 3 posts to get derailed. This is not a NM/NA debate.

 

Conversations tend to evolve. The difference between NA and NM and which to use is a closely related topic to the question raised in the OP. It is only natural that the question would be raised here.

 

... logged the find and then filed an archive request....

 

If I find the cache or it's remains I log a find. What I don't do is call in the big guns and demand it be archived. The owner, being responsible for the cache, and deserving of your respect for putting it out there for your fun deserves to be notified about the problem so thay can fix it.

 

Depends on the situation. If the CO is no longer active then save the step and post the NA. If the area has been bulldozed for a new construction project a NM would be pointless. But yeah, most times a NM log is the appropriate action.

[Mr.Yuck]

As so often happens in forums, this quickly diverted from the original question. It took all of 3 posts to get derailed. This is not a NM/NA debate.

The thread was still on topic as of post 5. I gave a detailed explanation of how I would log (or not). Your refusal in this thread to acknowledge your mistake or to at least consider it contributed to the hijack. Honestly, your last post came off as being pouty about being corrected. It was inappropriate to request archiving for either of the caches as the owners are still active. Further, the Voting Is Cool! cache has been out since 4/6/2002.

 

But as so often happens in forums, the OP digs their heels in and sticks to their own opinion against the good advice of the community.

 

Kind of reminds me of the few times Travel Bug Prison afficienado's have showed up here. It could be them vs. 500 posters, but they were just going to have their "take one, leave one" rule.

 

Holy crud! I didn't realize those caches were 2002 and 2006 placements. But far be it from me to pile on.

 

No offense, but a cache going missing once doesn't mean it has to be archived for all eternity. People do replace the containters of muggled caches, you know. Like tens of thousands of times since Geocaching started. I've done my part by doing it 3 times, I believe.

Unless it's an Ape.

 

That is 100% correct, and you are a pretty funny guy. Too Tall John doesn't know the frivolity he's missing.

 

And how do you know I'm not a reviewer, anyways?

good point. but unless the reply comes from the reviewer so--- err, alternate account, i don't consider it as an official reviewer opinion

 

Never in a thousand years would they ask, and never in a million would I accept. I think I will ask one though, the whole non-container thing is very interesting. And open to interpretation from reviewer to reviewer.

[+scuba_2]

who cares ! you should look for caches for fun. who cares if you log a cache or not. its the taking part do what you feel is right.

[+JohnnyVegas]

We have just passed 300 finds and today found our second muggled cache. Both were obviously muggled because we found the actual cache contents. The first one we did log as a found cache. It was an extremely time consuming Multi and there was no doubt that what we found were the remains of the cache. We cleaned up the remnants, logged the find and then filed an archive request. The question is, how do others treat these caches? Do you log them as found?

I have cachers claim finds on some of my caches because they were sure they had found what remaind of the cache. I many cases when I have checked on the caches in question I found have found them just as they were placed. In those cases I deleted the logs.

I would ask the CO owner for permission before loging the cache as a find.

Unless you find cache you should log a DNF. For some reasons many cacher will not log DNFs. How else is a cache owner going to know if there is a problem.

Edited November 5, 2010 by JohnnyVegas

[+J the Goat]

The listing is still there and the container can be replaced.

 

Just as everyone else has said, a "Needs Maintenance" is the appropriate response.

 

Thank you to everyone who posted appropriate responses to the original question.

 

As so often happens in forums, this quickly diverted from the original question. It took all of 3 posts to get derailed. This is not a NM/NA debate.

 

I was post 5. I was on topic. Stop whining.

 

Edit to show I can count.

Edited November 5, 2010 by J The Goat