Earthcache find

[+AbbeyAckbar]

I would like your opinions on this please.

What are your feelings on people requesting to log your EarthCache as found because they have been to the location even though it was before the Earthcache was published?

[+power69]

I would like your opinions on this please.

What are your feelings on people requesting to log your EarthCache as found because they have been to the location even though it was before the Earthcache was published?

the planet was here long before 2000. let them log it as long as they have the answers asked for the earthcache.

[+keehotee]

I would like your opinions on this please.

What are your feelings on people requesting to log your EarthCache as found because they have been to the location even though it was before the Earthcache was published?

 

If they were psychic enough to look up the answers while they were there - before you'd published them - then it's up to you I suppose.

 

I get an awful lot of foreign tourists logging one of my Earthcaches because the location's on a very popular stop-off. They then get home and log "just because they were there" - and have pictures to prove it. Sorry - but personally - I didn't put the Earthcache there so people who were visiting can claim it as a virtual -it's supposed to be educational, not a souvenir - and I didn't ask for photographic evidence in lieu of any of the answers, so they usually get deleted after I've emailed with the reasons why.....

[+LewisClan77]

I would like your opinions on this please.

What are your feelings on people requesting to log your EarthCache as found because they have been to the location even though it was before the Earthcache was published?

 

If they were psychic enough to look up the answers while they were there - before you'd published them - then it's up to you I suppose.

 

I get an awful lot of foreign tourists logging one of my Earthcaches because the location's on a very popular stop-off. They then get home and log "just because they were there" - and have pictures to prove it. Sorry - but personally - I didn't put the Earthcache there so people who were visiting can claim it as a virtual -it's supposed to be educational, not a souvenir - and I didn't ask for photographic evidence in lieu of any of the answers, so they usually get deleted after I've emailed with the reasons why.....

Well put.

[+J the Goat]

If they've been there and have the right answers, can you really justify NOT letting them keep the log? If the purpose is the education, and they already have the knowledge, mission accomplished right?

[+Sharks-N-Beans]

We have never gone after an Earthcache because we use caching as a physical release from the weekly mental grind. But would think if the posted requirements are met, it stands, otherwise it doesn't.

[+DanOCan]

I'll be honest -- as a seeker I wouldn't do it. I know of some virtuals where I have the information needed from visits before I started caching and it would feel wrong to log them now, especially if I was going to log it using a date when I wasn't actually at the cache site. It would screw with my caching history too much.

 

As an owner, I'd assume the seeker is OK with it and since it doesn't seem to harm anyone I'd let them log it, as long as they met the requirements.

[+AbbeyAckbar]

the planet was here long before 2000. let them log it as long as they have the answers asked for the earthcache.

 

really? before 2000? I must look into that anyway, the people requesting to log the EC as found don't have the answers for the EarthCache, and their photo and general description of the area is no substitution for the logging requirements. I thought it was a given that people would visit the site after the listing was published, with the intent of logging the cache, and fulfilling all requirements stated on the cache page.

 

I think caching can be to people what ever they want it to be, but equally the hiders reserve the right to only allow logs on their caches by people who meet the criteria. I think with the effort of putting an Earthcache together and obtaining landmanagers permission, the cache owner reserves the right to say you can't log it as found since you didn't visit the site with the intention of fulfilling all of the logging reuirements.

Edited May 29, 2011 by AbbeyAckbar

[+Bear and Ragged]

IF they can answer the questions correctly, you can't really say 'No'

The questions should be solvable on-site, and not solvable from an internet search...

 

If they can't, or won't answer the questions, then say 'No' and delete (or give them a chance to delete their own log first)

 

Would I log it?

And mess up my statistics and milestones? No!

[+J the Goat]

the planet was here long before 2000. let them log it as long as they have the answers asked for the earthcache.

 

really? before 2000? I must look into that anyway, the people requesting to log the EC as found don't have the answers for the EarthCache, and their photo and general description of the area is no substitution for the logging requirements. I thought it was a given that people would visit the site after the listing was published, with the intent of logging the cache, and fulfilling all requirements stated on the cache page.

 

I think caching can be to people what ever they want it to be, but equally the hiders reserve the right to only allow logs on their caches by people who meet the criteria. I think with the effort of putting an Earthcache together and obtaining landmanagers permission, the cache owner reserves the right to say you can't log it as found since you didn't visit the site with the intention of fulfilling all of the logging reuirements.

 

I agree with this exception: if they have the correct answers, I'm pretty sure you can't disallow the find. I'm not an earthcacher so I very well may be wrong, but I think if answers are right, there's not much you can do.

 

Pictures to substitue? Nope, not in my book. I'm the only one who reads that one though...

[+narcissa]

It's not something I would do, but if someone did it to one of my Earthcaches I would probably let it go.

[Keystone]

I am moving this thread from the Geocaching Topics forum to the Earthcaching forum.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

It's a game!!!!!

[+LewisClan77]

I own 9 ECs and have 3 more in the work. If I get an email with the required info I couldn't care less when they were there.

[+lamoracke]

If you are going to do it, I would not log it before the earth cache was published though, thats kinda tacky IMHO.

[mtbikernate]

If you are going to do it, I would not log it before the earth cache was published though, thats kinda tacky IMHO.

 

Prior to publishing - IF they have the answers is tricky. I do think it's tacky, but they do have the answers. Assuming you did your job as CO and made it so the answers are not Google-able, then I'd personally let it go. However, without the answers, I would not let the log stand. That's the whole point of the EC.

 

I didn't put the Earthcache there so people who were visiting can claim it as a virtual -it's supposed to be educational, not a souvenir

 

Agreed.

 

I have logged virts before that were at locations I visited post-publication and I learned that I had met the requirements for logging after I got home. IMO, what's it matter to the CO why I visited a site? As long as I meet the requirements and I was actually there, I'll log it. It's not like I'm a big numbers hound or anything (92 caches since 2001 - that must be a low for active cachers).

[+geoaware]

A strong set of onsite logging tasks solves this - they should be impossible to do prior to an EarthCache being published.....

[+hzoi]

This has come up once with one of my earthcaches. Normally I wouldn't, but I made an exception -- the cacher had been a tour guide at that location (and would have placed an earthcache there had they thought of it).

[cezanne]

A strong set of onsite logging tasks solves this - they should be impossible to do prior to an EarthCache being published.....

 

I have come across such logging tasks only at very rare occasions. Normally the logging tasks are related to what can be read at information boards at the location or what is directly visible at the site or are based on measuring tasks that are easy to guess. There are so many locations where it is extremely likely that someone will come up with an EC there within the next years.

Taking a few photos and a few notes will do the job even in quite complex cases.

 

Cezanne

[+Flintstone5611]

A strong set of onsite logging tasks solves this - they should be impossible to do prior to an EarthCache being published.....

 

At best they can be estimated. That usually becomes apparent in the accuracy of the answers. I have had a few "guessers" on my ECs.

[cezanne]

A strong set of onsite logging tasks solves this - they should be impossible to do prior to an EarthCache being published.....

 

At best they can be estimated. That usually becomes apparent in the accuracy of the answers. I have had a few "guessers" on my ECs.

 

I am sure that some people who have not been on site provide better guesses of some estimation tasks than I am able to do when having been there

and doing my best. I am very, very bad at estimating lengths, areas etc

 

Cezanne

[+geodarts]

In general, how can you find something that does not yet exist? If an earthcache is developed after I go to an area, I do not try to claim it. But this came up with one of my caches, where a person had visited the location within weeks of it being published (after a delay due to NPS review). They had contemplated developing an earthcache there and had all the answers so it was easy to let their log stand. Another person wrote to me and said that they had visited the area around the same time as the other cacher, but did not have any of the answers. I explained that an earthcache involves more than going to a particular location. . . .

 

A strong set of onsite logging tasks solves this - they should be impossible to do prior to an EarthCache being published.....

 

That is probably a separate topic in and of itself. I have seen this repeated in the forums on more than one occasion, but I never know what is meant by this. In general, most people seem to rely on specific information that has nothing to do with earth science (the number of poles or steps; the color of certain buildings, a sign on a rusty pole), estimates (which are an exercise in guess work on my part), elevation readings (which vary from unit to unit), material written on an interpretative sign, or optional photos that may be required if there is a dispute with any of the above.

[+Carbon Hunter]

A strong set of onsite logging tasks solves this - they should be impossible to do prior to an EarthCache being published.....

Agreed - but often in geographically significant areas I visit, I take photos of info boards in case I want to refer back, or keep the info booklets. Also estimating a height of a certain layer, description of a particular feature etc. may well be remembered years later if you are interested in the subject.

 

So even many on-site requirements could be looked up later. I guess the @game@ aspect and you as CO are the final arbiter on this one.

[+terratin]

A strong set of onsite logging tasks solves this - they should be impossible to do prior to an EarthCache being published.....

Agreed - but often in geographically significant areas I visit, I take photos of info boards in case I want to refer back, or keep the info booklets. Also estimating a height of a certain layer, description of a particular feature etc. may well be remembered years later if you are interested in the subject.

Yup, so do we; quite often including pictures of various features with a pen, lenscap or geological hammer...

 

There are a couple of earthcaches placed on locations we have visited before the EC was there, one of which we can answer the questions from memory (pics!) and with the help of google; and another one we might figure out the answers (pics and google again). Either way as we visited both places before we started geocaching, we're not trying to log those.

 

However, if an EC gets published on a location we have visited after we started geocaching, i might be tempted to log a find (obviously if we can answer the questions), as -at the moment- i cannot think of any reason why not. But that's something to discuss with Mrs. Terratin when the situation arises.

 

As for our own ECs: if the requirements are met, the log stands. "when" is not a requirement and therefore not a reason to deny a log. (Current opinion, we haven't had such logs yet)

 

Mr. Terratin