Responding to Logs

[+thehoomer]

We may not go out caching as often as we used to but we are still passionate about keeping our caches in good order and respond promptly to reports which arouse concern. Often though, we have gone out to check on a cache and despite logs to the contrary, have found all to be well. Just interested....at which point would you check on your cache? Do you take into account the experience of the cacher? Obviously, caches which are meant to be difficult will generate DNF's but what kind of comments have been the catalyst for a check from you? Damp/wet/damaged accepting of course.

 

Do you think that DNF's 'breed' DNF's especially on new caches?

[+ngrrfan]

We may not go out caching as often as we used to but we are still passionate about keeping our caches in good order and respond promptly to reports which arouse concern. Often though, we have gone out to check on a cache and despite logs to the contrary, have found all to be well. Just interested....at which point would you check on your cache? Do you take into account the experience of the cacher? Obviously, caches which are meant to be difficult will generate DNF's but what kind of comments have been the catalyst for a check from you? Damp/wet/damaged accepting of course.

 

Do you think that DNF's 'breed' DNF's especially on new caches?

I do not respond to the random DNF unless it is by someone I know would have found the cache. I'll wait until the cache has at least 3 DNFs not on the same day (that eliminates the chance that a group was out caching) before I'll check on one.

There are a couple of exceptions tho. I have one cache that is near a highway construction area and it is possible that it might go missing. Another cache I have is in a very busy area, again with some construction, and it too may go AWOL. Those I will check on more frequently.

[+T.D.M.22]

I'll usually only go right out and replace the logbooks fast. One or 2 DNF's won't bother me, unless they are by certain people, or someone who should/does know where it is. I've walked right up to a micro cache that others had posted DNF's, and I've spent 45 minutes on a 4 foot long cache that others found right away. It also depends on the cache type. A well cammo'd or micro will be harder to find and therefore I would expect more DNF's that my large cache that's bright orange, and not hidden.

[+dprovan]

I suppose it depends, doesn't it? I only have a few caches, none them are hard to get to, and I enjoy where they are, so I normally use any DNF as an excuse to visit. Since you have over 10 times as many hides as me, your situation is clearly different, so let me answer your question from the other point of view: as a seeker, I start to wonder why a CO hasn't checked a cache after 3 DNFs or so, and I start to wonder if a CO's paying attention after 3 independent DNFs by experienced seekers. But it takes more like 6 or 7 DNFs and most of year without a find before I'd start thinking that the CO's not geocaching any more.

[+Misty and Minou]

Although at the moment I ha ve no active hides, when I did I would make a judgement call based on which cache it was.

 

In one instance I had 2 caches DNFd by the same person on the same day, as I was unable to get out for maintenance at the time I dropped the DNFer a note asking them about their hunt. Based on the response I got 1 of the caches got disabled and the other left active.

 

In general if the cacher has a lower number of finds I'd not take action until another 1 or 2 DNFs appear. But again that does depend on how hard the hide is.

[+Palujia]

I have a bit of a problem with one of my caches - in that its in the crook of a tree, amongst other trees ! - It's location was carefully checked to place it exactly opposite the entrance of the location it's named after - It keeps moving ! - people move it when finding it and it gravitates towards other trees until I get either an aggrieved DNF or "co-ordinates are out" - GRRRR

[+redsox_mark]

I suppose it depends, doesn't it? I only have a few caches, none them are hard to get to, and I enjoy where they are, so I normally use any DNF as an excuse to visit. Since you have over 10 times as many hides as me, your situation is clearly different......

 

Ditto for me. I only have 9 active caches; and they are either close to home or work, so I'll tend to check them often on first sign of any possible issue. But I would not expect that from owners with many more hides.

[+Happy Humphrey]

I'm probably regarded as an "experienced" cacher, with finds over eight years in many countries. But I still post DNFs on caches that are supposed to by quite easy.

 

Sometimes the cache isn't there, but often it is but I just can't find it for some reason.

 

I think if you generally cache on your own (as I do) you can be temporarily blind to certain hides; perhaps if there's two or three someone stands at the spot where the cache is easily visible but on your own you stick to investigating from other angles. I don't know. Then there's the time factor; sometimes you feel like you can take all day if necessary. On other occasions ten minutes is the limit if you were expecting an easy find.

 

Hopefully the CO doesn't go rushing out to check, just because I couldn't spot it on the day!

[Langy]

I think the old saying of "Horses for Courses" is pretty apt here.

 

Every CO and every type of cache will have their own alarms as to when a cache needs to be checked.

I've only just published my first ever caches which are a series of six plus a bonus.

These have taken people to areas they were aware of in some sense but not aware how nice a place it was and never been there before.

 

Number one in the series was found quickly by the FTF and initially had problems with the coordinates but ended up spot on.

Now every other cacher has been out.

The cache itself is quite hard to find where I have only today increased its difficulty.

 

Today I checked the cache again and modified the coordinates a little.

I still expect quite a few DNF's as it is not visible all the time but will check whenever I walk past that way as it is a favourite of my lunchtime walks.

 

Now for all the other caches in the series a couple of DNF's on different days may ring bells as they are all actually quite easy to find.

 

Paul

[+MBFace]

Number one in the series was found quickly by the FTF and initially had problems with the coordinates but ended up spot on.

Now every other cacher has been out.

The cache itself is quite hard to find where I have only today increased its difficulty.

 

Today I checked the cache again and modified the coordinates a little.

 

I checked the original coordinates on Google Earth today and sure enough they were in a field just where my GPSr was pointing .....

 

There's also a warning about not trampling vegetation while looking for the cache which is a bit difficult when the lane is about the same width as some of the passing vehicles e.g. Network Rail transits .

Edited September 26, 2012 by MBFace

[Langy]

 

There's also a warning about not trampling vegetation while looking for the cache which is a bit difficult when the lane is about the same width as some of the passing vehicles e.g. Network Rail transits .

 

It was meant in the way that you do not need to trample all the vegetation down in order to find the cache. Some caches I've searched for (I'm sure most other also apply) were sat either in long grass or behind what looked like a field of stinging nettles. No other option other than wade in and crush everything down.

 

The caches I've placed on the series are all easily accessible if you are in the right location with just placing one foot off the road or pathway.

 

I'm sure others will be aware at times it is hard to get a good fix for the coordinates when placing a cache and I spent a lot of time on the series checking most things. Looks like cache 1 was the one that slipped the net. Hopefully this will be better now.

[+mellers]

I won't visit after one DNF, but 2 or 3 will get me out there pretty quickly. I also do maintenance visits periodically as well without any prompting. There is ONE cache I have though which has been muggled 4 times. Any DNF on that one at all, will get me out the next day, particularly as it's part of a series.

 

What I can't understand is people who put a NM log out saying something like "Ammo box broken" or "bonus clue missing" or "Log full", when it isn't. All 3 happened to me. I visited the next day to find, several blank pages and the bonus clue written clearly in TWO places and the ammo can hinge spindles simply not aligned properly! As a result, I try not to get jumpy when I see a DNF and "allow it to be". I try to be a bit less conscientious and will now wait for 2 or more DNF's before going out. I'm learning!

[+Teacosies]

I won't visit after one DNF, but 2 or 3 will get me out there pretty quickly. I also do maintenance visits periodically as well without any prompting. There is ONE cache I have though which has been muggled 4 times. Any DNF on that one at all, will get me out the next day, particularly as it's part of a series.

 

What I can't understand is people who put a NM log out saying something like "Ammo box broken" or "bonus clue missing" or "Log full", when it isn't. All 3 happened to me. I visited the next day to find, several blank pages and the bonus clue written clearly in TWO places and the ammo can hinge spindles simply not aligned properly! As a result, I try not to get jumpy when I see a DNF and "allow it to be". I try to be a bit less conscientious and will now wait for 2 or more DNF's before going out. I'm learning!

 

I'm the same it'll take two dnf's for me to check the cache out , but I also periodically do maintenance visits to all my caches.

 

I also get NM logs from people who cant find a specific cache - its well hidden they just dont read the description telling them where it is (night cache)...

Edited September 27, 2012 by Teacosies

[team tisri]

I won't visit after one DNF, but 2 or 3 will get me out there pretty quickly. I also do maintenance visits periodically as well without any prompting. There is ONE cache I have though which has been muggled 4 times. Any DNF on that one at all, will get me out the next day, particularly as it's part of a series.

 

What I can't understand is people who put a NM log out saying something like "Ammo box broken" or "bonus clue missing" or "Log full", when it isn't. All 3 happened to me. I visited the next day to find, several blank pages and the bonus clue written clearly in TWO places and the ammo can hinge spindles simply not aligned properly! As a result, I try not to get jumpy when I see a DNF and "allow it to be". I try to be a bit less conscientious and will now wait for 2 or more DNF's before going out. I'm learning!

 

I remember seeing a log by a cacher with 2 finds to their name that basically said "well I looked and couldn't find it, it must be missing" with a NM log. A couple of days previously it was logged as found. When I then think of another guy I know whose first attempt to find a cache was doomed to fail because he didn't realise the blue query icon meant a puzzle cache, I wonder how often people assume that it must have vanished just because they couldn't find it.