Mushy Logs

[+groo and co]

Hi, first time poster.....new to GC in NE AL. Have only toyed with GC'ing in the past but have taken it up as a hobby with some other folks.

 

What is best policy when finding a cache log that is soaked, mushed, missing, shredded etc.? Is it bad form to replace it and log the swap in the find comments or best to not monkey with it? I know the ones who put it there may not want it changed.

 

Thanks for the help ahead of time.

[knowschad]

Hi, first time poster.....new to GC in NE AL. Have only toyed with GC'ing in the past but have taken it up as a hobby with some other folks.

 

What is best policy when finding a cache log that is soaked, mushed, missing, shredded etc.? Is it bad form to replace it and log the swap in the find comments or best to not monkey with it? I know the ones who put it there may not want it changed.

 

Thanks for the help ahead of time.

 

I'm assuming you are taking about paper mache logs, right? There isn't much that can be saved when they are that bad. Personally, I'd either add a new log out of waterproof (Rite in the Rain) paper if I had some (and I generally do, at least if I'm near my car). Adding a new log while keeping the old soggy log in the cache as well is only going to get your new log wet.

[+Mom-n-Andy]

LOL. I thought you were talking about logs that went on and on about what a great cache it is and what a wonderful human being the CO was for hiding it.

 

To answer your question, you should not remove the log. You can post a "needs maintenance" log. If you can't sign what's there you can sign a piece of paper and leave it.

[knowschad]

LOL. I thought you were talking about logs that went on and on about what a great cache it is and what a wonderful human being the CO was for hiding it.

Now, why didn't I think of that?!?

[+groo and co]

LOL. I thought you were talking about logs that went on and on about what a great cache it is and what a wonderful human being the CO was for hiding it.

 

To answer your question, you should not remove the log. You can post a "needs maintenance" log. If you can't sign what's there you can sign a piece of paper and leave it.

 

good enough, and thanks....just wanted to be doing my part as we lug out trash and such.....I understand about needing maintenance and will be diligent about that.

[+SwineFlew]

Just sign the online log as, thank for the grotty log.

[+groo and co]

Hi, first time poster.....new to GC in NE AL. Have only toyed with GC'ing in the past but have taken it up as a hobby with some other folks.

 

What is best policy when finding a cache log that is soaked, mushed, missing, shredded etc.? Is it bad form to replace it and log the swap in the find comments or best to not monkey with it? I know the ones who put it there may not want it changed.

 

Thanks for the help ahead of time.

 

I'm assuming you are taking about paper mache logs, right? There isn't much that can be saved when they are that bad. Personally, I'd either add a new log out of waterproof (Rite in the Rain) paper if I had some (and I generally do, at least if I'm near my car). Adding a new log while keeping the old soggy log in the cache as well is only going to get your new log wet.

Roger, got it. Gonna let this topic soak for a bit and get a general consensus......I saw nothing specifically against it, but dont want to be "that guy"

[knowschad]

Hi, first time poster.....new to GC in NE AL. Have only toyed with GC'ing in the past but have taken it up as a hobby with some other folks.

 

What is best policy when finding a cache log that is soaked, mushed, missing, shredded etc.? Is it bad form to replace it and log the swap in the find comments or best to not monkey with it? I know the ones who put it there may not want it changed.

 

Thanks for the help ahead of time.

 

I'm assuming you are taking about paper mache logs, right? There isn't much that can be saved when they are that bad. Personally, I'd either add a new log out of waterproof (Rite in the Rain) paper if I had some (and I generally do, at least if I'm near my car). Adding a new log while keeping the old soggy log in the cache as well is only going to get your new log wet.

Roger, got it. Gonna let this topic soak for a bit and get a general consensus......I saw nothing specifically against it, but dont want to be "that guy"

 

You can never completely prevent being "that guy". There will always be that one cache owner in a million that says, "WHAT?!? You didn't save that generic wad of mush so I could check it over for bogus loggers?" There isn't much that you can do about that guy... he obviously doesn't understand paper mache.

[+groo and co]

Hi, first time poster.....new to GC in NE AL. Have only toyed with GC'ing in the past but have taken it up as a hobby with some other folks.

 

What is best policy when finding a cache log that is soaked, mushed, missing, shredded etc.? Is it bad form to replace it and log the swap in the find comments or best to not monkey with it? I know the ones who put it there may not want it changed.

 

Thanks for the help ahead of time.

 

I'm assuming you are taking about paper mache logs, right? There isn't much that can be saved when they are that bad. Personally, I'd either add a new log out of waterproof (Rite in the Rain) paper if I had some (and I generally do, at least if I'm near my car). Adding a new log while keeping the old soggy log in the cache as well is only going to get your new log wet.

Roger, got it. Gonna let this topic soak for a bit and get a general consensus......I saw nothing specifically against it, but dont want to be "that guy"

 

You can never completely prevent being "that guy". There will always be that one cache owner in a million that says, "WHAT?!? You didn't save that generic wad of mush so I could check it over for bogus loggers?" There isn't much that you can do about that guy... he obviously doesn't understand paper mache.

well, then i will deal with it on a case by case basis....if its just a journal and its completley destroyed then should be an easy fix. Just seems a shame to not be able to sign and your being a steward of the sport and doing someone a solid.

[+groo and co]

obtw....thanks to all for quick responses

[+briansnat]

If I can't sign the log I may leave a slip of paper with my name on it. I would never remove the log without the prior permission of the cache owner.

 

Besides if you replace it, your replacement is only going to get soggy anyway. The problem is with the container, which also needs replacing.

 

I'd log a NM and let the cached owner deal with it.

[knowschad]

If I can't sign the log I may leave a slip of paper with my name on it. I would never remove the log without the prior permission of the cache owner.

 

Besides if you replace it, your replacement is only going to get soggy anyway. The problem is with the container, which also needs replacing.

 

I'd log a NM and let the cached owner deal with it.

It is 100% certain to, though, if you put your new log in with the wet spitball.

[Clan Riffster]

What is best policy when finding a cache log that is in bad shape?

Hi Groo, welcome to the madness!

 

I can't say whether or not it's the "best" policy, but it's the one I use;

I will willingly hike miles out of my way to repair a needy cache, if it is one that happens to fit my rather narrow, biased cache aesthetics as being a quality hide. (AKA: It doesn't suck) However, I will not do anything to aid what I feel is a lame cache. If the location is uninspired, the container is ineffective at protecting its contents, the hide technique is stale, etc., I will usually just walk away. If you find a poor hide, and fix it up, you deprive the owner of the opportunity to learn why their container sucked. My advice? Don't be a crappy cache enabler.

[+groo and co]

What is best policy when finding a cache log that is in bad shape?

Hi Groo, welcome to the madness!

 

I can't say whether or not it's the "best" policy, but it's the one I use;

I will willingly hike miles out of my way to repair a needy cache, if it is one that happens to fit my rather narrow, biased cache aesthetics as being a quality hide. (AKA: It doesn't suck) However, I will not do anything to aid what I feel is a lame cache. If the location is uninspired, the container is ineffective at protecting its contents, the hide technique is stale, etc., I will usually just walk away. If you find a poor hide, and fix it up, you deprive the owner of the opportunity to learn why their container sucked. My advice? Don't be a crappy cache enabler.

groovy, will keep that in mind....

[+groo and co]

thanks for the welcome.....knocked out two more tonight with my kids....trying to plan to stop at places during trips to work store etc....my neighbor is randsand and we have a good little rivalry goin.

[+L0ne.R]

What is best policy when finding a cache log that is in bad shape?

Hi Groo, welcome to the madness!

 

I can't say whether or not it's the "best" policy, but it's the one I use;

I will willingly hike miles out of my way to repair a needy cache, if it is one that happens to fit my rather narrow, biased cache aesthetics as being a quality hide. (AKA: It doesn't suck) However, I will not do anything to aid what I feel is a lame cache. If the location is uninspired, the container is ineffective at protecting its contents, the hide technique is stale, etc., I will usually just walk away. If you find a poor hide, and fix it up, you deprive the owner of the opportunity to learn why their container sucked. My advice? Don't be a crappy cache enabler.

 

I agree with CR. Also what I would do is post an NM (Needs Maintenance) log, then put a Watch on the cache. If after a couple of months the CO does not respond and if the comments continue to mention the soggy log I would post a NA (Needs Archive). This gets the Reviewer's attention. Usually the Reviewer then posts a Reviewer Note which usually gets the CO's attention and they fix the problem. But sometimes it turns out that the CO has stopped caching and abandoned the cache. The Reviewer usually gives a CO another couple of months, if there's no response the cache will be archived opening up the area for another hide. If it's a nice area there may be people waiting for a chance to hide one of their own.

[+groo and co]

What is best policy when finding a cache log that is in bad shape?

Hi Groo, welcome to the madness!

 

I can't say whether or not it's the "best" policy, but it's the one I use;

I will willingly hike miles out of my way to repair a needy cache, if it is one that happens to fit my rather narrow, biased cache aesthetics as being a quality hide. (AKA: It doesn't suck) However, I will not do anything to aid what I feel is a lame cache. If the location is uninspired, the container is ineffective at protecting its contents, the hide technique is stale, etc., I will usually just walk away. If you find a poor hide, and fix it up, you deprive the owner of the opportunity to learn why their container sucked. My advice? Don't be a crappy cache enabler.

 

I agree with CR. Also what I would do is post an NM (Needs Maintenance) log, then put a Watch on the cache. If after a couple of months the CO does not respond and if the comments continue to mention the soggy log I would post a NA (Needs Archive). This gets the Reviewer's attention. Usually the Reviewer then posts a Reviewer Note which usually gets the CO's attention and they fix the problem. But sometimes it turns out that the CO has stopped caching and abandoned the cache. The Reviewer usually gives a CO another couple of months, if there's no response the cache will be archived opening up the area for another hide. If it's a nice area there may be people waiting for a chance to hide one of their own.

i appreciate that...i have noticed there is one guy in particular who seems to be the guilty party in the area.....maybe its that he has to many out but i am starting to be particularly cautious about trying to find a hide that hasnt been found in awhile unless its close to one i know is hot.

[+Fianccetto]

Good question. Normally I'd try to contact the CO and replace the log - offer to mail it to them if they would like it (I've always been thanked and asked to discard it). If there are logs saying other people have replaced the CO's mushy logs with dry ones and the CO complained about it on the cache page, it would make me a bit less inclined to help out. Also if the cache container is broken and not waterproof and is clearly not being maintained. I'd add my signature on some Rite in the Rain, take a photo of the soggy log and condition of the container and post it to the cache page with my (friendly and descriptive) found log and a NM and if necessary, a NA a couple of months later. So far another cacher has come along within a couple of months and replaced the cache container & logs on those I've been watching, which is another part of the game, as regions differ and it is not for one person to decide how it should be done everywhere. (I used to always replace anything I found needing maintenance until I understood from reading the forums that really, I was that one person deciding what was best in all these situations and also, some COs do not like being beholden to others and just need a reminder and a little time to fix their caches up.)

[+L0ne.R]

...a photo of the soggy log and condition of the container and post it to the cache page with my (friendly and descriptive) found log and a NM and if necessary

 

Photos are a great idea.

[hoosier guy]

Sometimes you can dry it out with the car heater and it will be ok. Other times when it is too far gone I'll drop a replacement in a plastic bag in the cache and leave the original there. It is a good idea to shoot a note to the CO and let them know you have done that though.

[+groo and co]

Sometimes you can dry it out with the car heater and it will be ok. Other times when it is too far gone I'll drop a replacement in a plastic bag in the cache and leave the original there. It is a good idea to shoot a note to the CO and let them know you have done that though.

thanks to you....will sort it out.

[+FalconMJ]

I would keep the old log in there, but insert a new bit of paper, and inform the cache owner you have done so.

[hoosier guy]

BTW did you really say "groovy?"

[+wimseyguy]

Just use a fine tip sharpie or pilot g-2 gel pen. They can put ink onto anything no matter how wet it is.

 

I usually carry some replacement logs and small ziplox with me, so I will add one of those if the one in the cache isn't really serving its purpose. But I won't remove it or anything else from the cache unless it is a guideline issue like food, knives, or bullets. Oh and bubbles, those little bottles of bubbles should really be in the unacceptable contents guidelines cuz they are bound to leak and mess up the insides.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Oh and bubbles, those little bottles of bubbles should really be in the unacceptable contents guidelines cuz they are bound to leak and mess up the insides.

 

I kept reading that. So, after six years, I went back to my first cache hide, and removed the bubbles I put in it. No leakage at all...

[Clan Riffster]

Oh and bubbles, those little bottles of bubbles should really be in the unacceptable contents guidelines cuz they are bound to leak and mess up the insides.

Yup. To date I've had to replace three ammo cans because some goober thought that bubble stuff would be great swag.

[knowschad]

Oh and bubbles, those little bottles of bubbles should really be in the unacceptable contents guidelines cuz they are bound to leak and mess up the insides.

 

I kept reading that. So, after six years, I went back to my first cache hide, and removed the bubbles I put in it. No leakage at all...

 

SIX YEARS LATER and the bubbles were still in the cache that you left them in? wow!

[+dwarner1]

This is something that I have been thinking about for a while. I also saw a similar post on /r/geocaching a few days ago.

 

I have run into a couple wet logs. On one occasion the container appeared to be OK, so I segregated the wet log into a new ziplock and placed a new log in another ziplock. That way if the owner wanted it for some reason, it was still there. Another one had only room for one, so I trashed the ruined one and replaced it. I would feel a little bad, but the cache had a maintenance request for over 2 months.

 

Lastly I found one the other day in a nice park and the whole thing was nasty and ruined. Didn't feel right, so I left it and reported it. It's apparently been reported for about 5 months. :|

 

I think I have come to the decision to add a log if I can, but not remove anything. I don't want to be 'that guy'.

Edited December 16, 2011 by dwarner1

[+Harry Dolphin]

Oh and bubbles, those little bottles of bubbles should really be in the unacceptable contents guidelines cuz they are bound to leak and mess up the insides.

 

I kept reading that. So, after six years, I went back to my first cache hide, and removed the bubbles I put in it. No leakage at all...

 

SIX YEARS LATER and the bubbles were still in the cache that you left them in? wow!

 

I'm sorry. It was only five years. I apologize. Most of the original contents still in the cache. 45 visits in seven years, and no one wanted the bubbles. Oh, well.

[+groo and co]

BTW did you really say "groovy?"

dont hate....im from ft wayne

[+groo and co]

This is something that I have been thinking about for a while. I also saw a similar post on /r/geocaching a few days ago.

 

I have run into a couple wet logs. On one occasion the container appeared to be OK, so I segregated the wet log into a new ziplock and placed a new log in another ziplock. That way if the owner wanted it for some reason, it was still there. Another one had only room for one, so I trashed the ruined one and replaced it. I would feel a little bad, but the cache had a maintenance request for over 2 months.

 

Lastly I found one the other day in a nice park and the whole thing was nasty and ruined. Didn't feel right, so I left it and reported it. It's apparently been reported for about 5 months. :|

 

I think I have come to the decision to add a log if I can, but not remove anything. I don't want to be 'that guy'.

thanks

[knowschad]

I think there needs to be some clarification here. When I see the subject, "Mushy logs", I'm thinking of the pulpy spitball, paper mache variety, not just a moist, humid, damp, or even somewhat wet log. Mushy logs really can't be dried out... even if you do, it will just fall apart. The paper has lost its structure. To leave a mess like that in a cache is doing nobody a favor. I would replace it, toss the soggy mess in my pocket, and forget about it. I would probably email the cache owner to let them know that the log was replaced, but without apology or offer to photograph or return the spitball.