Replaced Cache - Find or DNF?

[+Ecylram]

I was asked a while back to post this question...

 

The situation: We have an area where there are a large number of park and grabs spread over dozens of square miles. (These are not power trails.) The caches require semi-regular maintenance due to high winds, road work, animals, cachers, etc. Many of the owners in that area share maintenance duties and also allow cachers to perform maintenance as well. The system seems to work, but...here's the question:

 

The question: In this situation, if a cacher arrives to the GZ and see's an obvious hiding spot (i.e. a container holder, or the typical pile of rocks) but the cache is missing. If they choose to replace the cache (with implied or explicit permission) can they count the cache as a find? (Assume for the sake of this discussion that the cache really is missing.)

 

Argument for: Of course, they found the hide but couldn't complete the find due to circumstances out of their control. They provided a service to the CO and to following cachers by replacing the cache so they should be able to log a find for their help.

 

Argument against: Of course not, they didn't find the cache or the log. It was nice of them to replace the cache (if it needed replacing) but they didn't actually find a cache. No, they should be able to claim a find.

 

Off Topic: This is NOT a power trail thread. If you wish to rant or advocate about PT's then please take it to one of the many power trail threads. Thank you.

 

Ultimately it's between the cache owner and cacher how it is logged but, would you consider it a 'Find' or a 'DNF'?

[+StarBrand]

I would not do it in the first place - so it is a DNF. If they can't find the cache I set out - they should log a DNF as well

 

Just because Cacher A failed to find it does not necessarily mean that it is missing. Most cachers I know call what you describe as a "throw down" cache.

 

I delete find logs where they mention they tossed out a new container.

[Pup Patrol]

I would not do it in the first place - so it is a DNF. If they can't find the cache I set out - they should log a DNF as well

 

Just because Cacher A failed to find it does not necessarily mean that it is missing. Most cachers I know call what you describe as a "throw down" cache.

 

I delete find logs where they mention they tossed out a new container.

 

+1

[+Walts Hunting]

I had one guy do that on one of mine and I deleted the log as quickly as I could. Plus when I went out there the original container was just a few feet from where he put his throw down.

[+Ecylram]

Just because Cacher A failed to find it does not necessarily mean that it is missing.

 

Assume for the sake of this discussion that the cache really is missing.

 

I worded the question the way I did to rule out the situations where someone throws down film canisters to claim a find because they can't spot the 4-star difficulty cache that isn't missing. If the cache is missing and the CO is happy to have the missing cache replaced, should that be find if it is replaced?

[+the4dirtydogs]

I think if it's o.k. with the CO to replace their hide then why not claim the cache as a find. I have permission from one CO to replace or repair any of their hides. I think it's a nice way to help out the CO and keep the missing cache in play for the rest of the players. It's just a game.

 

I guess the real argument would be how do you know the cache was missing.

[Pup Patrol]

If the cache is missing and the CO is happy to have the missing cache replaced, should that be find if it is replaced?

 

If the cache owner has given the hunter explicit permission to replace the missing cache, then neither a "found it" or a "DNF" would be posted, in my opinion.

 

A "write note" log would be the way to go, no?

 

Post a note that says "container replaced with permission of cache owner".

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=246

Edited March 24, 2011 by Pup Patrol

[mresoteric]

If the cache is missing and the CO is happy to have the missing cache replaced, should that be find if it is replaced?

What did they find?

[+Team GPSaxophone]

The only time you should replace a container is if the original is still there (probably broken or leaking) and you have an exact replacement. If you don't find the cache, post a DNF and let the cache owner decide what to do with it.

 

I've had people replace containers for me when I was actually going to archive the cache. I usually go back out there and can't find the new container because it had moved that much. I usually find my container a short distance in the other direction.

[+the4dirtydogs]

If the cache is missing and the CO is happy to have the missing cache replaced, should that be find if it is replaced?

 

If the cache owner has given the hunter explicit permission to replace the missing cache, then neither a "found it" or a "DNF" would be posted, in my opinion.

 

A "write note" log would be the way to go, no?

 

Post a note that says "container replaced with permission of cache owner".

 

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=246

So your going to post a note that you replaced the container. So this means that you will never get the find for this cache. Do you wait for someone else to replace the container then go find it? Why waste the gas? You're already there, so what's the big deal on signing the log on a cache you replaced with the owners permission. This isn't a throw down cache, it's a replacement cache for the CO.

[+StarBrand]

Just because Cacher A failed to find it does not necessarily mean that it is missing.

 

Assume for the sake of this discussion that the cache really is missing.

 

I worded the question the way I did to rule out the situations where someone throws down film canisters to claim a find because they can't spot the 4-star difficulty cache that isn't missing. If the cache is missing and the CO is happy to have the missing cache replaced, should that be find if it is replaced?

The issue I have is - how did they arrive to the absolute conclusion that it is missing??

 

If the owner knows it to be missing - I cannot imagine asking somebody that has never ever previously found the cache to go and replace it.......

 

Still not a find - even assuming owner has given permission and the cacher doing the replacing had never found it. Placing <> Finding

[+Avernar]

The question: In this situation, if a cacher arrives to the GZ and see's an obvious hiding spot (i.e. a container holder, or the typical pile of rocks) but the cache is missing. If they choose to replace the cache (with implied or explicit permission) can they count the cache as a find? (Assume for the sake of this discussion that the cache really is missing.)

I would not replace the cache and if nobody else in the group does, DNF.

 

If someone else in the group that hasn't found it replaces it I would still DNF it. I wouldn't come back until the CO does a maintenance visit or a sufficient number of finds show that there aren't duplicate containers.

 

If someone who has found it before, or the CO, replaces it while I'm there then it would be a found. I'd wouldn't look while they hid it so I can still have fun finding it.

[Mr.Yuck]

Just because Cacher A failed to find it does not necessarily mean that it is missing.

 

Assume for the sake of this discussion that the cache really is missing.

 

I worded the question the way I did to rule out the situations where someone throws down film canisters to claim a find because they can't spot the 4-star difficulty cache that isn't missing. If the cache is missing and the CO is happy to have the missing cache replaced, should that be find if it is replaced?

The issue I have is - how did they arrive to the absolute conclusion that it is missing??

 

If the owner knows it to be missing - I cannot imagine asking somebody that has never ever previously found the cache to go and replace it.......

 

Still not a find - even assuming owner has given permission and the cacher doing the replacing had never found it. Placing <> Finding

 

I agree with Starbrand, I'd say. Ecylram, I have seen links to a website created by a cacher from your area where he has a little "lets help each other with cache maintenance" mission statement, along with icons people can put on their cache pages. Is this what you're referring to? Because I think this is a pretty regional thing going on in your area.

[+Ecylram]

I agree with Starbrand, I'd say. Ecylram, I have seen links to a website created by a cacher from your area where he has a little "lets help each other with cache maintenance" mission statement, along with icons people can put on their cache pages. Is this what you're referring to? Because I think this is a pretty regional thing going on in your area.

 

I've seen the icon and descriptions you're referring to. I know there is at least one cacher out of Colorado Springs who puts that on all their caches. I suppose that would be in the same vein.

[Mr.Yuck]

I agree with Starbrand, I'd say. Ecylram, I have seen links to a website created by a cacher from your area where he has a little "lets help each other with cache maintenance" mission statement, along with icons people can put on their cache pages. Is this what you're referring to? Because I think this is a pretty regional thing going on in your area.

 

I've seen the icon and descriptions you're referring to. I know there is at least one cacher out of Colorado Springs who puts that on all their caches. I suppose that would be in the same vein.

 

Well, the cache owner wanting people to replace their cache, and deeming them worthy of determining whether it's missing or not in the first place, is a totally foreign concept for me. But I guess I will say it's a not a find if there is no container to find or logbook to sign.

[+_Wolverine]

This is almost like where I posed the question of where you placed your own cache, do you log it as a find? Most people were on the fence with that one..

 

In regards to this topic, I would agree - I don't like it when others replace a "cache" because they THINK it's missing and putting down a film canister and a log and resurrecting the cache. What if the original cache was a hanging micro in a tree? Or what if the original container was a "rock" cache, etc. If they couldn't find it, how do they know what the original intent of the CO for that particular cache?

 

Doing a throw down of a film canister for a replacement and logging it as a find is a joke.

 

However, if the cacher contacts the CO and asks what they originally had, whether it was hanging from a tree branch, was on the ground, etc.. then I'm all for the find log - as long as it's kept to its original intent. Anything else.. DELETE... and if the CO still doesn't want to maintain it or fix it.. then ARCHIVE IT!

 

I see logs where CO gets lots of DNF's and they don't respond... and then someone comes by with a replacement and they get all riled up... why didn't they check on the cache before this transpired?

[+briansnat]

Simple. It's a DNF in my book because I didn't find the cache. I'd probably follow with a note mentioning that I replaced the cache, but I'd only do that if I had the CO's blessing before hand. Then again, if he knew it was missing and I had yet to find it I'm not sure how I'd be certain to replace it in the proper place, so doing that is pretty silly.

 

To your question "can they count the cache as a find?" They can count anything they want as a find as long as the cache owner says it's OK. Not sure why they would want to though.

Edited March 24, 2011 by briansnat

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

1) Sounds like a way to generate lazy cache owners, you know, the kind that show no degree of responsibility. The ones that let others take care of their cache.

 

2) Placing a throw-down means that you DID NOT FIND IT! Just what in the world is wrong with common sense? Now, for the sake of argument, you "threw it down", just why in the world of beans would you claim a find for something you put there? Good grief. You may as well claim a find on your own hides, because that is exactly what it is.

 

3) Level of difficulty has little to do with whether one can/cannot find a cache. Putting a throw-down when you don't KNOW (I don't mean an obvious hiding spot) where it is. Be it missing, be it not missing. YOU DON'T KNOW!

 

My 2½¢

[+briansnat]

This is almost like where I posed the question of where you placed your own cache, do you log it as a find? Most people were on the fence with that one..

 

Not sure what thread that was. Every time that comes up the sentiment here is overwhelmingly against it. There aren't a lot of fence sitters on that subject.

[+Ecylram]

This is almost like where I posed the question of where you placed your own cache, do you log it as a find? Most people were on the fence with that one..

 

Not sure what thread that was. Every time that comes up the sentiment here is overwhelmingly against it. There aren't a lot of fence sitters on that subject.

 

That's been my impression as well.

[+Sins DS]

I actually found myself in this situation. Spotted the likely hide, contacted the CO to verify it, sent photographic proof that they'd been muggled again, got permission to log it as a find, and told them, "No thanks. I'll log it after you replace it, I've found it, and the log is signed.", and did so, two and a half months later.

 

There's another nearby that we'll "find" once the logbook is dry enough to sign.

 

I'm not after the find, I'm after excuses to go look.

[+Harry Dolphin]

If you didn't find the cache, it's a DNF. Seems fairly simple.

[+NeecesandNephews]

Was away from the game for a bit. When I returned there was a series of Cemetery caches all around us. I started hunting them down one at a time. One just a mile and a half from our home I could not locate. There was a large hollow metal corner post in the fenceline my GPS kept leading me to.

Logged a DNF, and sent an email to the CO asking for a hint. Told him where I thought it should be. He confirmed it was missing. He lives about 45 miles away so I offered to replace it. He thanked me and told me he would appreciate it tremendously, and that I should go ahead and log a find on it.

I put together a container similar to the others I found, and hid it in the same manner he had hidden a couple others.

I did not, and will not log a find on it. I did NOT find it, I HID it.

[knowschad]

Without reading other replies yet... obvious hiding spot... no. NO! no.

 

Parts of cache strewn around... log book, swag, pieces of container... you replace it... yes.

 

The difference... obvious hiding spot may not be the hiding spot. You have no idea. Now, this may be different in the desert, but that's my take on it.

[+briansnat]

Was away from the game for a bit. When I returned there was a series of Cemetery caches all around us. I started hunting them down one at a time. One just a mile and a half from our home I could not locate. There was a large hollow metal corner post in the fenceline my GPS kept leading me to.

Logged a DNF, and sent an email to the CO asking for a hint. Told him where I thought it should be. He confirmed it was missing. He lives about 45 miles away so I offered to replace it. He thanked me and told me he would appreciate it tremendously, and that I should go ahead and log a find on it.

I put together a container similar to the others I found, and hid it in the same manner he had hidden a couple others.

I did not, and will not log a find on it. I did NOT find it, I HID it.

 

I think your reasoning is reasonable.

[+Stargazer22]

I agree with others that have stated that hiding does not equal finding. I log a DNF if I don't find.

[Mr.Yuck]

Without reading other replies yet... obvious hiding spot... no. NO! no.

 

Parts of cache strewn around... log book, swag, pieces of container... you replace it... yes.

 

The difference... obvious hiding spot may not be the hiding spot. You have no idea. Now, this may be different in the desert, but that's my take on it.

 

Well, doesn't sound like the desert here, but a unique situation of rural roadside park-n-grabs. I'm probably repeating myself, but I'll say it this way; I would not claim a find on something I just put there.

 

I always subscribe to the "it's up to the cache owner" theorem, and I would imagine they allow finds in the situation presented. Most people helping with maintenance here log finds, I assume?