Jump to content

log book/logging etiquette


T0mmyT

Recommended Posts

Greetings,

 

My family is relatively new to all of this. We have only one 'official' find. :)

 

We were visiting my sister in a different town last night and threw on the ole smart phone and went looking for a couple on our way home. We found 2 out of 3. The problem is we didn't have a pen or pencil, so we couldn't sign the log book. In that case, do you log it online here? What does everyone else do (besides make sure they have a pencil)?

 

It's something where I'm sure we'll visit her again sometime in our life ;) so we can go back and sign those logs (not to mention take another shot at the one we couldn't find) so we could wait until then to log it online.

 

Just wondering.

 

Thanks!

Link to comment

There are few "rules" in geocaching, but signing the logbook is one.

 

Having a pen is as essential as having a GPS.

 

Recently I found a cache in 30 seconds, but it took me 20 minutes to find a pencil in my trunk because for once I didn't have one in my purse.

 

Some people have been known to use mud and a stick when desperate. Just note online if your signature is not totally legible.

 

For a while I had a mini pen tied on my GPS. That worked well.

Link to comment

Greetings,

 

My family is relatively new to all of this. We have only one 'official' find. :)

 

We were visiting my sister in a different town last night and threw on the ole smart phone and went looking for a couple on our way home. We found 2 out of 3. The problem is we didn't have a pen or pencil, so we couldn't sign the log book. In that case, do you log it online here? What does everyone else do (besides make sure they have a pencil)?

 

It's something where I'm sure we'll visit her again sometime in our life ;) so we can go back and sign those logs (not to mention take another shot at the one we couldn't find) so we could wait until then to log it online.

 

Just wondering.

 

Thanks!

You found them, so go ahead and log them as found! :lol: Just mention in your log that you didn't have a pencil and that you plan on returning to sign the log at a later date.

Link to comment

Nobody panic or get their knickers in a twist! I'm sure TommyT will in short order be the owner of a large backpack full of essential caching items - including a pen!

 

FYI TommyT - we find Sharpie pens work really well on wet log sheet. Others will swear by gel pens. Regular ballpoints and pencils tend to just rip through the paper.

Link to comment

Try to carry a pen. Most decent COs won't delete your log. State you didn't have a pen. If something is questioned by the CO then you could always describe to the owner exactly where the cache was and give a good description. Just DON'T put that into the online log (that would be a spoiler for anyone else).

 

I never signed my 1st cache found. Didn't realize about the logging aspect at the time. The cache was so cleverly decorated that I ignorantly thought the setup was the cache. :) But, I did have photos that proved I found the cache.

Link to comment

I rarely carry a pen while caching because most of the caches around here contain a pen or pencil. The few times I encountered one that didn't I found a way to leave my mark. I've signed my initials with a stick dipped in mud, a rolled up leaf, the ashes from the end of my cigar and a soft stone. Though I wouldn't advise it, I've heard of cachers who have pricked their finger and signed in blood.

Link to comment

Nobody panic or get their knickers in a twist! I'm sure TommyT will in short order be the owner of a large backpack full of essential caching items - including a pen!

 

FYI TommyT - we find Sharpie pens work really well on wet log sheet. Others will swear by gel pens. Regular ballpoints and pencils tend to just rip through the paper.

 

I have found that Pigma Micron (or similar) pens work the best. I use the 005 size as it allows me to write neatly and very small so its awesome for nano caches. They are felt tip-ish so they flow smoothly even on less than good condition log paper plus they are smudge/bleed/water proof so your tiny signature doesn't end up a blob. B)

Link to comment

In that case I would take a picture of the cache and go ahead and log the find. Mention in your log that you do have a pic for confirmation if the CO gets picky. Most won't worry about it and will allow the find. If you get one who is a Puritan and insists, no sig = no smiley and deletes your log, don't argue, just accept it and move on...they have the guidelines in their side and it's just a game, after all...not worth fighting over.

Link to comment

We just came back from a short trip on which we found a bunch of caches, but did not sign two of them. One was a regular size cache beneath a low boardwalk along an extremely popular stretch of the California coast (Moonstone Beach in Cambria, for those of you familiar with the area). We both squatted briefly and saw the cache right where the coords showed, but there was no way in the world to retrieve it without literally dozens of people seeing what we were doing. The other was a metal tube lying in some scaffolding beneath a viewing platform. Zipster at 6'2" tall couldn't reach it from below, if we'd tried from above, we were afraid we'd knock it off into the plants below.

 

To be honest, I never realized signing the log was a rule of some kind. I guess if they disown these finds, we'll come back another time and claim them. But judging from the number of wet or completely filled logs we find, I wonder how many COs really look at them?

Link to comment

Truth be told, most CO's don't go out and confirm every find logged online....only if there is some doubt of the veracity of the find, and often not even then. Generally speaking, signing the physical log is the only real requirement of this game. If you didn't sign the log it's not a find. If you were unable to retrieve the cache because you couldn't reach it, that was obviously part of the challenge put forth by the hider. You couldnt rise to the challenge, i would say that's no find. If, however, you had the cache in your hand but were unable to sign because the log sheet was missing or the container was rusted shut or some other circumstance that was clearly NOT the intention of the hider, then I would claim that find. Most CO's would let it stand.

 

As a cache owner I would probably delete any log that claimed a find but admitted that they couldn't reach the container. If you really want to claim it, just post a simple "Found it" without mentioning the rest. Most CO's would never know that you didn't sign it. Of course, that's not the right way to play the game but no one would know but you. In the end you'd only be cheating yourself.

Link to comment

You found it using a 'Smart Phone' take a picture of the container (not of the location and post it) and then mention no pen/pencil/blood/stick/mud etc. If the owner doesn't allow it then we can all go back to the Dark Ages.

We have some caches around here where the CO specifically asks not to post photos of the cache.

 

An alternative would be to take a photo of the cache container and e-mail that to the CO as proof you were there.

 

I always carry a Fisher Space Pen with a fine point refill...great for damp logs.

Link to comment

I'm a fairly serious birder. When I was a beginner, I would sometimes add to my list a bird that I'd barely seen, but the trip leader pointed out - maybe all I saw was a flash of brown flying past, but the leader was able to identify it. Later on, when I'd learned a lot more about birding, I went back and deleted many of those "finds" from my personal list, and added them some time later when I'd actually seen and identified the bird myself. Others I knew would feel just fine claiming the original sighting.

 

I guess the point of all this is that in any game that's scored on the honor system, you can do whatever makes you comfortable, but you have to realize that you're really not playing by the rules. I never knew that signing the log was a "rule" of geocaching, now I know. Thanks for all the comments. These forums are a wonderful asset.

Link to comment

You found it using a 'Smart Phone' take a picture of the container (not of the location and post it) and then mention no pen/pencil/blood/stick/mud etc. If the owner doesn't allow it then we can all go back to the Dark Ages.

We have some caches around here where the CO specifically asks not to post photos of the cache.

 

An alternative would be to take a photo of the cache container and e-mail that to the CO as proof you were there.

 

I always carry a Fisher Space Pen with a fine point refill...great for damp logs.

 

You wouldn't post the photo since as you say COs don't care for that. But you would email the CO the photo as proof you were there. Everyone forgets a pen now and again so no big deal. Most COs let that slide. Now if I noticed a cacher with a pattern of forgetting I'd think about some deletions w/o some other proof.

 

I keep a pencil and a fine point sharpie in my bag.

Link to comment

Everyone forgets a pen now and again so no big deal. Most COs let that slide. Now if I noticed a cacher with a pattern of forgetting I'd think about some deletions w/o some other proof.

 

Nope. Please do not say 'everyone'. I've never forgotten to bring a pen whilst geocaching. Signing the log is an integral part of geocaching. I'll never understand why anyone would go out geocaching without a pen. I did lose my pen once. Fortunately the next cache had 26 pens in it. But, I'll never let that happen again!

Link to comment

You found it using a 'Smart Phone' take a picture of the container (not of the location and post it) and then mention no pen/pencil/blood/stick/mud etc. If the owner doesn't allow it then we can all go back to the Dark Ages.

We have some caches around here where the CO specifically asks not to post photos of the cache.

 

An alternative would be to take a photo of the cache container and e-mail that to the CO as proof you were there.

 

I always carry a Fisher Space Pen with a fine point refill...great for damp logs.

 

You wouldn't post the photo since as you say COs don't care for that. But you would email the CO the photo as proof you were there. Everyone forgets a pen now and again so no big deal. Most COs let that slide. Now if I noticed a cacher with a pattern of forgetting I'd think about some deletions w/o some other proof.

 

I keep a pencil and a fine point sharpie in my bag.

I have posted an up close photo of the log a couple of times. This shows the names of recent finders, which match up with online logs.

Link to comment

This discussion is long over but I’m wondering... 

would anyone bother ‘reporting’ someone who logged a find online of a puzzle

cache that hasn’t been found in over a

year and when I found it the other day, her name was nowhere to be found. It would have been a ‘lonely’ cache but because this person signed it, it isn’t (even though the person didn’t sign the physical log of a puzzle that was fairly difficult for a newer cacher). Thoughts? 
 

just curious what people typically do!

Link to comment
52 minutes ago, NurseB33 said:

This discussion is long over but I’m wondering... 

would anyone bother ‘reporting’ someone who logged a find online of a puzzle

cache that hasn’t been found in over a

year and when I found it the other day, her name was nowhere to be found. It would have been a ‘lonely’ cache but because this person signed it, it isn’t (even though the person didn’t sign the physical log of a puzzle that was fairly difficult for a newer cacher). Thoughts? 
 

just curious what people typically do!

 

I've seen that happen locally (but not on one of my caches). The person who really found it photographed the logbook and sent the pictures to the CO, who then deleted the bogus log (probably after trying to contact the bogus logger). I've also deleted a couple of finds on one of my challenge caches where the finder hadn't qualified and on my EarthCache where the logger simply refused to provide any answers to the questions. Ultimately it's the CO's responsibility to maintain the integrity of the online logs.

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, NurseB33 said:

... would anyone bother ‘reporting’ someone who logged a find online of a puzzle

cache that hasn’t been found in over a

year and when I found it the other day, her name was nowhere to be found. It would have been a ‘lonely’ cache but because this person signed it, it isn’t (even though the person didn’t sign the physical log of a puzzle that was fairly difficult for a newer cacher). Thoughts? 
 

just curious what people typically do!

 

We've come across caches where we didn't see the last logger's signature - in fact, just the other day, we found a cache that was missing several signatures ... makes us wonder if there's a throwdown somewhere nearby and we found the "real" cache?  We just signed the logsheet of the one we found, and moved on.

 

In the case where it was a lonely cache, I would be tempted to take a photo of the logsheet and let the CO decide what to do.  Then again, although I enjoy finding lonely caches, I'm not tracking them in any way (though there are some challenges out there) so personally, I'd claim the find, know my log was legitimate, and move on.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, NurseB33 said:

This discussion is long over but I’m wondering... 

would anyone bother ‘reporting’ someone who logged a find online of a puzzle

cache that hasn’t been found in over a

year and when I found it the other day, her name was nowhere to be found. It would have been a ‘lonely’ cache but because this person signed it, it isn’t (even though the person didn’t sign the physical log of a puzzle that was fairly difficult for a newer cacher). Thoughts? 

just curious what people typically do!

 

 Similar to barefootjeff, if the CO has an issue, they can fix it.    You can tell on that person if you'd like. 

There may even be an explanation why there's no signature.   :)

Just curious, would you "report it" to help the CO, or because you wanted that "lonely" cache and now feel cheated ? 

Thanks. 

Link to comment
6 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

 Similar to barefootjeff, if the CO has an issue, they can fix it.    You can tell on that person if you'd like. 

There may even be an explanation why there's no signature.   :)

Just curious, would you "report it" to help the CO, or because you wanted that "lonely" cache and now feel cheated ? 

Thanks. 

 

I found a cache in 2017, last logged in 2015.  Last signature in the log book was 2012.  I noted that in my log.  As far as I'm concerned, that's the loneliest cache that I've found.  I have found four that had not bee found in over four years.  But that's on my list for 1 year 6 months.  I wondered about the log "I was out today running errands and trying to fill in another loop of my D/T grid." on a hike that's almost a mile each way.  But the CO left the log.  (Yes.  I do keep track of my lonely finds.  I enjoy them.)

Link to comment
25 minutes ago, Harry Dolphin said:

 

I found a cache in 2017, last logged in 2015.  Last signature in the log book was 2012.  I noted that in my log.  As far as I'm concerned, that's the loneliest cache that I've found.  I have found four that had not bee found in over four years.  But that's on my list for 1 year 6 months.  I wondered about the log "I was out today running errands and trying to fill in another loop of my D/T grid." on a hike that's almost a mile each way.  But the CO left the log.  (Yes.  I do keep track of my lonely finds.  I enjoy them.)

That can be annoying when the CO takes no action. Maybe the CO didn't want to upset the person who didn't sign the log (and who might never even have found the cache), but in so not wanting to upset them, they could upset the next logger, who like you is collecting unloved caches, perhaps for a challenge. I reported a couple of caches that were logged online, but there was no signature in the log. I wanted them for a challenge. One cache was a multi with several stages and the online log said something like, "Found the first point," which was an admittance that the logger had never found the final GZ with the cache. I think that log was left. It was disappointing for a couple of us who wanted it for a challenge. Now if I find a missing log I often take a photograph of the log and include that with my log. I may or may not say anything and leave it for the CO to work out; if they care at all . If I say anything it will be simply something like, "First signature in five months." and leave it up to the CO to check.

The loneliest cache I have made a note of was GCRN95. I found it after a gap of 1364 days. It was over two years after me to the following finder.

Link to comment
13 hours ago, NurseB33 said:

This discussion is long over but I’m wondering... 

would anyone bother ‘reporting’ someone who logged a find online of a puzzle

cache that hasn’t been found in over a

year and when I found it the other day, her name was nowhere to be found. It would have been a ‘lonely’ cache but because this person signed it, it isn’t (even though the person didn’t sign the physical log of a puzzle that was fairly difficult for a newer cacher). Thoughts? 
 

just curious what people typically do!

First, if I'm really sure there's no signature, I'll mention it in my find log. I don't accuse anyone, I just say I couldn't find the signature. I think that's a datapoint that might be interesting to someone, but I don't worry about who might want to know about it or why.

 

Second, if it really seems likely this wasn't a find, I'll ask the finder about it. More than once, I've seen a find claimed that was obviously a mistake, like a cache that's nowhere near where the person was caching that day or having a puzzle that's way harder than their other finds suggest they're capable of solving. When that happens, I assume it was just a mistake, so I bring it to the finder's attention and explain why I think they might have logged the wrong cache. Then I leave it up to them to decide what to do about it, if anything.

 

As to the lonely cache issue: forget about it. They logged it online, so the find is valid. Don't consider using it for a lonely challenge. Your doubts about the accuracy of their claim isn't really a factor here even though I understand why you'd like to think otherwise. If this is the one lonely cache you need, then I feel your pain, but I suggest you see it as encouragement to go out and make some other cache less lonely. At least in this case, you didn't go out and look for it because you thought it was lonely. I once went out of my way to find a lonely cache to add to my list, but when I got there, there's was a more recent signature in the log that wasn't reflected online. Argh!

Link to comment
2 hours ago, dprovan said:

First, if I'm really sure there's no signature, I'll mention it in my find log. I don't accuse anyone, I just say I couldn't find the signature. I think that's a datapoint that might be interesting to someone, but I don't worry about who might want to know about it or why.

 

 

It may not be there and annoying if not. Just be sure you (the collective you) have checked the entire log front to back. In spite of it irritating 50% of you, I've been known to sign any open spot I found on the log minimizing how much "rolling and folding" has to be done to put the log back. There's is no rule that I am aware of that says I have to follow some order on the paper. Obvious my philosophy applies more to those evil micros that are everywhere and less so to larger caches where there's an actual, you know, log book.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On 11/14/2019 at 2:48 PM, bflentje said:

 

It may not be there and annoying if not. Just be sure you (the collective you) have checked the entire log front to back. In spite of it irritating 50% of you, I've been known to sign any open spot I found on the log minimizing how much "rolling and folding" has to be done to put the log back. There's is no rule that I am aware of that says I have to follow some order on the paper. Obvious my philosophy applies more to those evil micros that are everywhere and less so to larger caches where there's an actual, you know, log book.

 

There many also be cases where maintenance has been performed (not necessarily by the CO) to clean up wet log sheets that may contain signatures of previous finders.  Personally, I wouldn't assume that someone didn't legitimately find the cache if I don't see a signature and am aware that not all COs treat their cache the same.  Some/Many Co's don't mind exercising a little leniency when it comes to signing the physical log sheet and will accept other evidence.   

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...