Flat Geocaches? Are they allowed? Buy on EBAY?

October 9, 2012

It seems from one of my other threads some people have eluded to the fact that "Flat Caches" are no longer allowed. Is this true? If it is...someone needs to tell this guy.

8.3k · October 9, 2012

Here is just one auction from this guy

It seems from one of my other threads some people have eluded to the fact that "Flat Caches" are no longer allowed. Is this true? If it is...someone needs to tell this guy.

Does it have a logbook? Then I don't see why the shape of the container is regulated in the guidelines, although I must admit I normally don't fall asleep reading the guidelines. So I would say it is fine except, of course, for the problem with permission on private property. I've found a number of these types of hides.

October 9, 2012

Here is just one auction from this guy

It seems from one of my other threads some people have eluded to the fact that "Flat Caches" are no longer allowed. Is this true? If it is...someone needs to tell this guy.

I have seen people make that comment based on the idea that the log doesn't have a container. But that is easily bypassed with a small baggy attached to it. So although you can't just have an open air magnet cache, there are ways to keep it "legit". Although I am still not sure if that is official or someone trying to apply what they believe to be the letter of the law.

3.7k · October 9, 2012

I thought caches need a container and a logbook. I guess, technically, if the logbook was contained in something that was attached to the back of the sign, it would be OK?

But other than that, yeah, I thought flat caches were not allowed.

October 9, 2012

i have seen caches like this where the log is in a baggie attached to the back of the magnet. I guess the baggie is considered the container. Considering that I've found caches that were nothing more than a baggie and a log, I'd suppose this is legit.

October 9, 2012

I've seen and found lots of caches like this, with a bag at the back as TomToad described. Will be following this thread with interest, and would appreciate if a reviewer would jump in and give us an opinion :-)

38.2k · October 9, 2012

That's a nano? And as far as the world's sneakiest cache, when I hid one of those in 2003 it fooled a lot of people. I doubt it would today.

From this reviewer's perspective, if there was a Ziploc duct taped or glued to the back for a logbook then you have a container and it would be OK.

19k · October 9, 2012

I have personally heard from reviewers that those are not allowed, without, as some have already said, a separate log somehow attached or contained. A baggie taped to the back is sufficient, but the problem then is that they don't lie perfectly flat. You can layer two sheets of magnet, with a hole cut in the back one, and use that to hide the baggie, but then the problem is the double-thickness.

Personally, I think it is just a silly game of semantics. TPTB love to tell us how the guidelines were developed because of real-world problems encountered with landowners and such... but I fail to see how that fits in this case.

11.6k · October 9, 2012

TPTB love to tell us how the guidelines were developed because of real-world problems encountered with landowners and such... but I fail to see how that fits in this case.

I've only found one flat cache like that, and it was never maintained. The NM logs were all about "log is full", and when I found it, the log was completely covered with signatures with no way to add paper. I signed across the most faded signature. These kinds of caches (and micros in general) require the MOST diligence by COs, yet are basically throw-downs. Just an observation. Maybe if a CO will address common problems, an exception will be allowed. The one I found was pretty cool, and had an excellent hint.

If flat caches are banned, it could instead be a stage in a Multi.

Edited October 9, 2012 by kunarion

19k · October 9, 2012

TPTB love to tell us how the guidelines were developed because of real-world problems encountered with landowners and such... but I fail to see how that fits in this case.

I've only found one flat cache like that, and it was never maintained. The NM logs were all about "log is full", and when I found it, the log was completely covered with signatures with no way to add paper. I signed across the most faded signature. These kinds of caches (and micros in general) require the MOST diligence by COs, yet are basically throw-downs. Just an observation. Maybe if a CO will address common problems, an exception will be allowed. The one I found was pretty cool, and had an excellent hint.

If flat caches are banned, it could instead be a stage in a Multi.

If cache maintenance were sufficient reason to ban a cache type, we would soon be out of a hobby. Lack of maintenance has never been stated as a reason for a guideline, aside from the maintenance guideline itself.

I've had two flat caches, one was indeed the first stage of a multi (a fake bronze "load limit" plaque on a footbridge) and the other was inside of a lamp skirt, full size of one side of the skirt. Never seen an LPC get so many DNFs.

6k · October 9, 2012

Logged one of those the other day in Helena MT. There was a ziplock bag on the back with the log.

11.6k · October 9, 2012

I've had two flat caches, one was indeed the first stage of a multi (a fake bronze "load limit" plaque on a footbridge) and the other was inside of a lamp skirt, full size of one side of the skirt. Never seen an LPC get so many DNFs.

It's fun to find a cache in plain view, kind of a mystery to solve, even though it may only be mysterious once (then you know what to look for). It would be a shame if they were banned. But if there are a lot of "Found it, couldn't sign the log" on one particular style, I understand the reasons.

So I hope people keep creating fun camo ideas using the basic ideas, even when some caches go out of favor. I had a plain-view cache in Muggle Central (it wasn't a flat cache) in place for over a year, amazingly only found by cachers. I kept an eye on it, since displacement could quickly get it lost. I archived it because the parks department tied a garbage can to it. :rolleyes:

Edited October 9, 2012 by kunarion

2.6k · October 9, 2012

We found our first like this ( with a lot of help ) in Nashville almost 10 years ago. Since then they have popped up around the country and I have one out myself.

They can still be very effective.......as for being " legal ", I think they're fine.

11.6k · October 9, 2012

It seems from one of my other threads some people have eluded to the fact that "Flat Caches" are no longer allowed. Is this true? If it is...someone needs to tell this guy.

Doesn't eight bucks for the thing seem kind of expensive? If I scouted around, I could probably get a whole boxful of random letters & numbers for $8. OK, maybe it's the costly water-resistant paper. :anicute: Seriously, that's like $50 a sheet.

But there are several "cache"-like online games, some that likely allow this without questions. And there are a bunch of possible ways to get this published on GC, with a little modification to the hide style, even if it's not allowed as a "flat cache". I still won't buy that particular thing, since I'm so sure I could make an entire fun container with lettering for that price. But it's nice to check out cool ideas.

I'd also suggest that if a questionable item on ebay has ZERO questions posted, don't buy it. Just a suggestion.

Edited October 9, 2012 by kunarion

19k · October 9, 2012

....as for being " legal ", I think they're fine.

Except that they're not.

October 9, 2012

I've found a few of these before. Had no idea they weren't allowed.

19k · October 9, 2012

I've found a few of these before. Had no idea they weren't allowed.

Remember that the reviewer generally doesn't know details on how the cache is constructed unless either the cache owner volunteers that information, the reviewer finds it in his geocaching role, or somebody reports it. Additionally, I'd imagine that any existing caches of that type would be left alone.

October 9, 2012

I've found a few of these before. Had no idea they weren't allowed.

Remember that the reviewer generally doesn't know details on how the cache is constructed unless either the cache owner volunteers that information, the reviewer finds it in his geocaching role, or somebody reports it. Additionally, I'd imagine that any existing caches of that type would be left alone.

I'd assume if they are not allowed, the reviewer wouldn't know this. Not that it bothers me..

14k · October 9, 2012

I have personally heard from reviewers that those are not allowed, without, as some have already said, a separate log somehow attached or contained. A baggie taped to the back is sufficient, but the problem then is that they don't lie perfectly flat. You can layer two sheets of magnet, with a hole cut in the back one, and use that to hide the baggie, but then the problem is the double-thickness.

Personally, I think it is just a silly game of semantics. TPTB love to tell us how the guidelines were developed because of real-world problems encountered with landowners and such... but I fail to see how that fits in this case.

Agreed. Playing the silly game of semantics when interpreting the "no buried caches" guideline, or the guidelines related to damage, defacement, or the destruction of public or private property, can result in real-world problems with land managers. However, while some might consider a flat cache with a baggie taped to the back to be a semantic interpretation of a "container" it really isn't going to cause a problem with land managers unless it violates some other guideline (i.e. it's placed on an electric power distribution box without permission).

6.7k · October 9, 2012

I've used this idea as the first stage of a multi way back when I first started caching. I agree, it would not likely fool many today. I also would not use it again because of the damage done by cachers trying to find it. Not only did they trash a thirty foot radius looking for it someone even dismantled the telephone junction box it was on. A very real reminder of why we have to account for the least intelligent amongst us when placing a cache. I did go to the location hoping I could repair the damage. But by the time I got there some driver had left the road and gone right over the top of it. I feel luck that I didn't have to pay for damages.

1.6k · October 9, 2012

Who needs a log book when you can sign a perfectly round bowling ball...... I gave this one a favorite point!

I've found several flat caches - not a darn thing wrong with them. I'm not sure why they'd disallow it. If that's the case, they're taking away all our creativity options.

3k · October 9, 2012

Even if flat caches are disallowed by Groundspeak they could be sold on ebay and listed on another caching site.

I have found some flat caches. One was like that depicted in the ebay auction; keeping the log dry was near impossible.

I've seen many more flat caches that were a magnet with write-in-rain paper glued to one side and see no problem with them. While I can see how they might very technically violate the "container" portion of cache requirements, by having a logsheet and GPS coords they meet the spirit of the guidelines with neglible risks (unlike say buried caches).

I have also seem other "no container" caches besides the magnet: a log in a baggie stuffed in crack of a styrofoam buoy on a sidewalk and a community bulletin board that included a "Geocaching Club Signup Sheet" (i.e. the logsheet). Did the buoy cache have a container because it was in a baggie? Did the bulletin board cache have a container because the board had a glass cover - and if it didn't have a cover does the cache become prohibited?

It would seem that strict interpretation of "container" means a flat cache is banned, but a grocery bag with a log sheet is technically okay?

7.8k · October 9, 2012

I've seen many more flat caches that were a magnet with write-in-rain paper glued to one side and see no problem with them.

The biggest problem I've seen with these is that they rarely last long. Rite-in-the-rain does not mean completely-waterproof-forever. Rite-in-the-rain will degrade if it stays wet, and these types of hide are invariably in spots where they do get consistently wet. I've found half a dozen of these type, and every single one has been in bad shape, even one that had only been out for a few weeks.

However, if you're hiding caches in the desert, it might be okay...

19k · October 9, 2012

Here are a few variations on the flat geocache theme:

http://www.cachingcontainers.com/sf/Flat_Geocache_Containers

2.6k · October 9, 2012

I've seen many more flat caches that were a magnet with write-in-rain paper glued to one side and see no problem with them.

This describes the one I have out.....its located out of the weather and after several years and a ton of no finds is doing fine.

3.1k · October 9, 2012

I've seen many more flat caches that were a magnet with write-in-rain paper glued to one side and see no problem with them.

The biggest problem I've seen with these is that they rarely last long. Rite-in-the-rain does not mean completely-waterproof-forever.

Another option that I've seen is to simply apply a coat of white paint on the back of the magnetic sheet. People use pens to sign their name. When the sheet is filled, the owner applies another coat of white paint.

1.1k · October 10, 2012

I'm reading alot of stuff regarding container/log definitions relating to flat caches etc. The only guideline I have found is:

3.Geocache Contents 1.Cache containers include a logsheet or logbook. For all physical caches, there must be a logbook, scroll or other type of log for geocachers to record their visit.

I believe "other type of log" is wide open as long as cachers can "record their visit".

I believe the following definitions for "contain", which includes an album containing music (cut or pressed into the surface of the disk) make the flat vinyl a container.

con·tain (kn-tn) KEY

TRANSITIVE VERB:

con·tained, con·tain·ing, con·tains

To have within; hold.

To be capable of holding.

To have as component parts; include or comprise: The album contains many memorable songs.

Until the guideline changes, I'm fine w/ containers that have integrated logs.

19k · October 10, 2012

I've seen many more flat caches that were a magnet with write-in-rain paper glued to one side and see no problem with them.

The biggest problem I've seen with these is that they rarely last long. Rite-in-the-rain does not mean completely-waterproof-forever.

Another option that I've seen is to simply apply a coat of white paint on the back of the magnetic sheet. People use pens to sign their name. When the sheet is filled, the owner applies another coat of white paint.

That is exactly what we are talking about that is no longer allowed (actually, its been several years since I first heard that they weren't allowed anymore)

5.3k · October 10, 2012

That is exactly what we are talking about that is no longer allowed (actually, its been several years since I first heard that they weren't allowed anymore)

You keep saying that despite posts from reviewers who say they are indeed allowed as long as they have a container and logbook. Can you please point to some official document that says they are not? If not, I recommend that you stop making the claim.

21.9k · October 10, 2012

I would not knowingly publish a magnet cache with a painted white back. It lacks a logsheet that is enclosed by a container. (I can't believe I'm defending a dog!)

I would publish a cache like Bamboozle's, where the magnet encloses a logsheet in a way reasonably designed to keep the logsheet both watertight and replaceable.

The guideline interpretation about "flat caches" and logsheets is designed to give caches a fighting chance at being maintained properly.

19k · October 10, 2012

That is exactly what we are talking about that is no longer allowed (actually, its been several years since I first heard that they weren't allowed anymore)

You keep saying that despite posts from reviewers who say they are indeed allowed as long as they have a container and logbook. Can you please point to some official document that says they are not? If not, I recommend that you stop making the claim.

I first learned about it from this forum, but it isn't something I care to take the time to search for just to prove it to you. You can recommend what you'd like.

21.9k · October 10, 2012

I'm reading alot of stuff regarding container/log definitions relating to flat caches etc. The only guideline I have found is:

3.Geocache Contents 1.Cache containers include a logsheet or logbook. For all physical caches, there must be a logbook, scroll or other type of log for geocachers to record their visit.

I believe "other type of log" is wide open as long as cachers can "record their visit".

I believe the following definitions for "contain", which includes an album containing music (cut or pressed into the surface of the disk) make the flat vinyl a container.

con·tain (kn-tn) KEY

TRANSITIVE VERB:

con·tained, con·tain·ing, con·tains

To have within; hold.

To be capable of holding.

To have as component parts; include or comprise: The album contains many memorable songs.

Until the guideline changes, I'm fine w/ containers that have integrated logs.

I merged this post into the existing discussion.

I caution against interpreting "other type of log" as being "wide open." For starters, the log must be separate from the container. A CD with scratches on it is not a container with a separate log.

1.1k · October 10, 2012

I caution against interpreting "other type of log" as being "wide open." For starters, the log must be separate from the container. A CD with scratches on it is not a container with a separate log.

Funny, the guidelines are resembling SOPs at work Appreciate if someone in the know could post the guideline regarding the log being separate from the container.

21.9k · October 10, 2012

I caution against interpreting "other type of log" as being "wide open." For starters, the log must be separate from the container. A CD with scratches on it is not a container with a separate log.

Funny, the guidelines are resembling SOPs at work Appreciate if someone in the know could post the guideline regarding the log being separate from the container.

You quoted the applicable guideline language in your earlier post (post #27).

October 10, 2012

Just to stir the pot

How do books (that are the physical log book) placed in libraries as caches fit into the guidelines? Is the cover of the book the container and the pages the log?

21.9k · October 10, 2012

Just to stir the pot

How do books (that are the physical log book) placed in libraries as caches fit into the guidelines? Is the cover of the book the container and the pages the log?

Consider that, in addition, the entire book is enclosed by a large waterproof container made of brick, stone, steel or other material not likely to be blown down by the big bad wolf. :anibad:

8k · October 10, 2012

I have personally heard from reviewers that those are not allowed, without, as some have already said, a separate log somehow attached or contained. A baggie taped to the back is sufficient, but the problem then is that they don't lie perfectly flat. You can layer two sheets of magnet, with a hole cut in the back one, and use that to hide the baggie, but then the problem is the double-thickness.

Personally, I think it is just a silly game of semantics. TPTB love to tell us how the guidelines were developed because of real-world problems encountered with landowners and such... but I fail to see how that fits in this case.

It's a silly game of not knowing what the rationale is behind this guideline is. Keystone hints at something below:

The guideline interpretation about "flat caches" and logsheets is designed to give caches a fighting chance at being maintained properly.

I suppose that since many geocachers carry spare log sheets they might leave a blank log sheet in place of one that got full. Not many geocachers carry spare magnetic sheets, CDs, or empty water bottles, so if they find one of these used as a log and it is full they can't just replace it - although they might be able to add a baggie and a paper log sheet.

I'm not sure I buy this however. It sounds more like giving in to some puritan demand for legible log sheets. We all know you can always squeeze in some kind of mark on the back of magnetic sheet or scratched into a CD, and nobody cares if you you have to write illegibly on those tiny nano scrolls. Yet someone must have complained about a cache using some unconventional log or where they couldn't just add a slip of paper when the log was full. The puritans have sucked the fun out of caching. :mad:

The best log I found was one of those children's magic slates you write on with a stylus and then peal back the sheet to erase it. It had room for about two names, after which the next cacher had to erase the slate and start over. The puritans can rejoice that such a log would not be tolerated today <_<

Edited October 10, 2012 by tozainamboku

19k · October 10, 2012

I have personally heard from reviewers that those are not allowed, without, as some have already said, a separate log somehow attached or contained. A baggie taped to the back is sufficient, but the problem then is that they don't lie perfectly flat. You can layer two sheets of magnet, with a hole cut in the back one, and use that to hide the baggie, but then the problem is the double-thickness.

Personally, I think it is just a silly game of semantics. TPTB love to tell us how the guidelines were developed because of real-world problems encountered with landowners and such... but I fail to see how that fits in this case.

It's a silly game of not knowing what the rationale is behind this guideline is. Keystone hints at something below:

The guideline interpretation about "flat caches" and logsheets is designed to give caches a fighting chance at being maintained properly.

I suppose that since many geocachers carry spare log sheets they might leave a blank log sheet in place of one that got full. Not many geocachers carry spare magnetic sheets, CDs, or empty water bottles, so if they find one of these used as a log and it is full they can't just replace it - although they might be able to add a baggie and a paper log sheet.

Guidelines also state clearly that it is the cache owner that is responsible for maintenance of the cache, so that logic doesn't really fly, does it? However, that is essentially what I took away from Keystone's post.

5.7k · October 10, 2012

I logged one similar a few years ago. It was up so high that I had to park close and stand on the tail gate.

I enjoyed it and the coordinates were right on. :anibad:

19k · October 10, 2012

That is exactly what we are talking about that is no longer allowed (actually, its been several years since I first heard that they weren't allowed anymore)

You keep saying that despite posts from reviewers who say they are indeed allowed as long as they have a container and logbook. Can you please point to some official document that says they are not? If not, I recommend that you stop making the claim.

OK... since you asked so politely:

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=267839

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=235492

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=203265

There. May I now continue making that claim?

5.3k · October 10, 2012

That is exactly what we are talking about that is no longer allowed (actually, its been several years since I first heard that they weren't allowed anymore)

You keep saying that despite posts from reviewers who say they are indeed allowed as long as they have a container and logbook. Can you please point to some official document that says they are not? If not, I recommend that you stop making the claim.

OK... since you asked so politely:

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=267839

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=235492

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=203265

There. May I now continue making that claim?

I think I misread what your wrote; I thought you said that flat caches were not allowed under any conditions; on re-reading, you are saying that they are not allowed without some kind of logbook attached.

My bad. Sorry.

14k · October 10, 2012

I caution against interpreting "other type of log" as being "wide open." For starters, the log must be separate from the container. A CD with scratches on it is not a container with a separate log.

Funny, the guidelines are resembling SOPs at work Appreciate if someone in the know could post the guideline regarding the log being separate from the container.

You quoted the applicable guideline language in your earlier post (post #27).

Perhaps the guideline is just not clear enough but I like the interpretation of the log (could be a book, a sheet, a scroll..) as a separate physical item from the container. Using the phrase, "a container and a log" implies that they are two separate items, even if they are physically attached to each other in some manner.

In another post Keystone suggested that a book, which was used as log, inside a library building was acceptable as the building itself could be considered the container. While I see no harm whatsoever in creating a cache like that, it does push the boundaries of defining a container into silly semantics.

That said, one of my favorite caches was a 20 foot long, 6 foot diameter abandoned culvert pipe. The cache description suggested a refrigerator magnet as a theme for the swag. The log book was attached to the inside of the pipe with magnets and all the swag was stuck to the inside of of the pipe near the log.

7.3k · October 10, 2012

Here is just one auction from this guy

It seems from one of my other threads some people have eluded to the fact that "Flat Caches" are no longer allowed. Is this true? If it is...someone needs to tell this guy.

The ad doesn't say that this is to be used for geocaches published by Groundspeak.

Maybe the other cache listing sites don't have the same restrictions, and this type of cache would be allowed.

B.

19k · October 10, 2012

That is exactly what we are talking about that is no longer allowed (actually, its been several years since I first heard that they weren't allowed anymore)

You keep saying that despite posts from reviewers who say they are indeed allowed as long as they have a container and logbook. Can you please point to some official document that says they are not? If not, I recommend that you stop making the claim.

OK... since you asked so politely:

http://forums.Ground...howtopic=267839

http://forums.Ground...howtopic=235492

http://forums.Ground...howtopic=203265

There. May I now continue making that claim?

I think I misread what your wrote; I thought you said that flat caches were not allowed under any conditions; on re-reading, you are saying that they are not allowed without some kind of logbook attached.

My bad. Sorry.

That's alright. We all have a bad now and then. Bads are part of human nature. I consider myself very fortunate to have bads as an option... I make far fewer actual mistakes since bads were invented.

1.1k · October 10, 2012

I caution against interpreting "other type of log" as being "wide open." For starters, the log must be separate from the container. A CD with scratches on it is not a container with a separate log.

Funny, the guidelines are resembling SOPs at work Appreciate if someone in the know could post the guideline regarding the log being separate from the container.

You quoted the applicable guideline language in your earlier post (post #27).

Perhaps the guideline is just not clear enough but I like the interpretation of the log (could be a book, a sheet, a scroll..) as a separate physical item from the container. Using the phrase, "a container and a log" implies that they are two separate items, even if they are physically attached to each other in some manner.

In another post Keystone suggested that a book, which was used as log, inside a library building was acceptable as the building itself could be considered the container. While I see no harm whatsoever in creating a cache like that, it does push the boundaries of defining a container into silly semantics.

That said, one of my favorite caches was a 20 foot long, 6 foot diameter abandoned culvert pipe. The cache description suggested a refrigerator magnet as a theme for the swag. The log book was attached to the inside of the pipe with magnets and all the swag was stuck to the inside of of the pipe near the log.

OK, so it's an interpretation. I can accept that if I ever hide one that broaches this subject. When I said I was fine with integrated caches, I guess I was saying that I wouldn't caution another cacher if I came across one. I still wouldn't because, at least for me, the interpretation is a stretch...and I don't have the time to give a heads-up on all the integrated caches I've come across.

5k · October 10, 2012

I caution against interpreting "other type of log" as being "wide open." For starters, the log must be separate from the container. A CD with scratches on it is not a container with a separate log.

Funny, the guidelines are resembling SOPs at work Appreciate if someone in the know could post the guideline regarding the log being separate from the container.

You quoted the applicable guideline language in your earlier post (post #27).

Perhaps the guideline is just not clear enough but I like the interpretation of the log (could be a book, a sheet, a scroll..) as a separate physical item from the container. Using the phrase, "a container and a log" implies that they are two separate items, even if they are physically attached to each other in some manner.

In another post Keystone suggested that a book, which was used as log, inside a library building was acceptable as the building itself could be considered the container. While I see no harm whatsoever in creating a cache like that, it does push the boundaries of defining a container into silly semantics.

That said, one of my favorite caches was a 20 foot long, 6 foot diameter abandoned culvert pipe. The cache description suggested a refrigerator magnet as a theme for the swag. The log book was attached to the inside of the pipe with magnets and all the swag was stuck to the inside of of the pipe near the log.

I don't like describing the library as a container. I would rather this be considered to be an acceptable exception to the guidelines. I know that no cache sets a precedence for any other cache, but describing the library this was tells me that I can stick a paper napkin in a knothole in a tree and call it a geocache. The tree is the container and my napkin log is inside it.

19k · October 10, 2012

I don't like describing the library as a container. I would rather this be considered to be an acceptable exception to the guidelines. I know that no cache sets a precedence for any other cache, but describing the library this was tells me that I can stick a paper napkin in a knothole in a tree and call it a geocache. The tree is the container and my napkin log is inside it.

I don't, either. Does that mean that a magnetic vinyl cache is OK if it is inside of a library?

15.3k · October 10, 2012

FWIW, I haven't seen a library cache that simply put the logbook on the shelf, using the library (or the shelf, or the room within the library, or whatever) as the "container". But I have seen library caches that used a fake/hollow book as the container, with a separate logbook inside that container.

3k · October 10, 2012

I would not knowingly publish a magnet cache with a painted white back. It lacks a logsheet that is enclosed by a container. (I can't believe I'm defending a dog!)

I would publish a cache like Bamboozle's, where the magnet encloses a logsheet in a way reasonably designed to keep the logsheet both watertight and replaceable.

Of the "magnet with write-in-rain paper on the back" flat caches I've found, the cache has always been someone out of direct rain (in a guardrail, under a phone booth) though still exposed to moisture. Each time they were still signable despite this being Florida.

The one time I've found a flat magnet covering a logsheet to "enclose" it against a metal object (also in FL) the log was soaked. Similarly, I have a magnetic TB tag on my bumper and I take it off every time it rains because water gets between the bumper and the magnet.

YMMV.

19k · October 10, 2012

FWIW, I haven't seen a library cache that simply put the logbook on the shelf, using the library (or the shelf, or the room within the library, or whatever) as the "container". But I have seen library caches that used a fake/hollow book as the container, with a separate logbook inside that container.

That is true of the few library caches that I have found, as well (guessing maybe a half-dozen, at most)

Flat Geocaches? Are they allowed? Buy on EBAY?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment