DaBigKahuna Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Here's the situation. Cache has been muggled. All contents including logbook are missing. I logged it as a "Needs Maintenance." In looking at the CO account, he has not been on the website for a few years. He has six caches and all but this one have been archived. Therefore I doubt that the CO will react to my "Needs Maint." log and restock the cache. So what would you do? Do I not log because there was no logbook to sign? Do I log a find without a signature? Quote Link to comment
+pppingme Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 From what you just said, maybe you didn't find it, maybe its better hidden than you think. How do you know its missing beyond the fact you couldn't find it? Quote Link to comment
DaBigKahuna Posted December 20, 2013 Author Share Posted December 20, 2013 From what you just said, maybe you didn't find it, maybe its better hidden than you think. How do you know its missing beyond the fact you couldn't find it? I found the cache container... an altoids tin with a magnet. It was sitting out in the open and opened with nothing inside, Quote Link to comment
+Don_J Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 From what you just said, maybe you didn't find it, maybe its better hidden than you think. How do you know its missing beyond the fact you couldn't find it? I found the cache container... an altoids tin with a magnet. It was sitting out in the open and opened with nothing inside, My first thought was if you had actually found the cache container. I've seen people not find the cache but what was actually someone elses discarded cache. However, an Altoids tin with a magnet is a good indication that you did find the actual cache. That gives you several options. Do the maintenance for the absentee owner by signing a new log, putting it in the cache,and re-hide it in the obvious spot and post a find. Post a Needs Maintenance log, wait a month and then a Needs Archive log and when the reviewer archives it, basically end the CO's caching career once and for all. Take the second option and then hide your own cache at the same location. Personally, considering that the CO is not active and all of their other caches have been archived, I'd go through the process of getting their final unmaintained cache archived. Quote Link to comment
+dprovan Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Given that you're sure it was the cache, I'd stick a new log in it and consider it an ordinary find. From what you're describing, the only problem with the cache was a missing log, and that doesn't even rate a needs maintenance log unless there's a serious question about where it was supposed to be hidden. In particular, your analysis of the cacher's status and his record should have nothing to do with it. What would you do if the owner has a spotless record and is well known for quickly maintaining his caches? Do that. Make sure not to bias you evaluation by thinking there's some moral imperative to "clean up" a bygone cacher's last cache. Quote Link to comment
+Don_J Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Given that you're sure it was the cache, I'd stick a new log in it and consider it an ordinary find. From what you're describing, the only problem with the cache was a missing log, and that doesn't even rate a needs maintenance log unless there's a serious question about where it was supposed to be hidden. In particular, your analysis of the cacher's status and his record should have nothing to do with it. What would you do if the owner has a spotless record and is well known for quickly maintaining his caches? Do that. Make sure not to bias you evaluation by thinking there's some moral imperative to "clean up" a bygone cacher's last cache. I was able to figure out what cache it is. It's been in place since 2005. Out of the last 20 or so logs, one is a NM for being a rusted out Altoids container, two note that the cache was just laying on the ground and had to be re-hidden. Logs from 2011 say that it is rusted out and two others say that they have replaced the wet moldy log. Spoiler pics show a big green transformer box. This is a basic urban micro cache that has no owner. I say put it out of it's misery. That probably won't happen because someone is always willing to come along and do whatever is necessary to get their precious smiley. I think that the the original poster did the right thing by posting a Needs Maintenance. No cache needs to live forever, especially a rusted Altoids tin stuck under a transformer box, whose owner has abandoned eight years ago. Quote Link to comment
team tisri Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Given that you're sure it was the cache, I'd stick a new log in it and consider it an ordinary find. From what you're describing, the only problem with the cache was a missing log, and that doesn't even rate a needs maintenance log unless there's a serious question about where it was supposed to be hidden. In particular, your analysis of the cacher's status and his record should have nothing to do with it. What would you do if the owner has a spotless record and is well known for quickly maintaining his caches? Do that. Make sure not to bias you evaluation by thinking there's some moral imperative to "clean up" a bygone cacher's last cache. There's not much point in maintaining a cache for an inactive owner, sooner or later it will just fall into disrepair again and even if you do maintain the cache there's no way to remove that "Needs Maintenance" cache attribute. If the CO isn't active any more, log a Find because it appears you found what was left of the cache, also log NM and say that it's in a bad way, and if they do nothing within a month then log NA noting the lack of response to NM logs. If they truly can't get to the cache within a few weeks (unlikely but possible) they can always leave a note to indicate what's happening, and maybe disable the cache until they can get to it. If you subsequently want to place your own cache in a nearby spot, go right ahead. Quote Link to comment
+Chief301 Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Given that you're sure it was the cache, I'd stick a new log in it and consider it an ordinary find. From what you're describing, the only problem with the cache was a missing log, and that doesn't even rate a needs maintenance log unless there's a serious question about where it was supposed to be hidden. In particular, your analysis of the cacher's status and his record should have nothing to do with it. What would you do if the owner has a spotless record and is well known for quickly maintaining his caches? Do that. Make sure not to bias you evaluation by thinking there's some moral imperative to "clean up" a bygone cacher's last cache. I feel that we as players do have an obligation, or at least an incentive, to "clean up the game board" periodically. Dropout players, or even still-active players who refuse to maintain their caches, make the caching experience less enjoyable for the rest of us. This game has various "styles" of play that are constantly evolving, but two of the accepted tenets are that if you place a cache it is your responsibility to maintain it, and that if you decide you are no longer willing or able to maintain it you archive it and see to the removal of the debris (or adopt it out as another option). These players have violated this very basic premise. Personally, I'd give a little more leeway to the cache owner who is not maintaining their hides but is still involved in the game. At least you know that person is still playing, can be contacted (theoretically), hasn't died, etc. But after a certain period of time it does become obvious that that person's brief dabbling with Geocaching was just that, a passing fancy, and they will probably not care (or indeed, even notice) that their cache has been removed from play. Quote Link to comment
+dprovan Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 (edited) I was able to figure out what cache it is. It's been in place since 2005. Out of the last 20 or so logs, one is a NM for being a rusted out Altoids container, two note that the cache was just laying on the ground and had to be re-hidden. Logs from 2011 say that it is rusted out and two others say that they have replaced the wet moldy log. A history of trouble with a marginal container is entirely different. What you described originally was a minor, one-time problem, and I don't want people to think they could use an excuse like that to archive a cache just because they don't want caches around by owners that haven't logged in lately. As I think I made clear, the point is to evaluate the cache, not the cache owner. Edited December 20, 2013 by dprovan Quote Link to comment
+fuzzybelly Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 From what you just said, maybe you didn't find it, maybe its better hidden than you think. How do you know its missing beyond the fact you couldn't find it? Funny! I like saying; It may not be missing, I may have just missed it Quote Link to comment
+TeamRabbitRun Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 All these replies, and only one answer (from Team Tisri). The actual question was, "Can I log it as 'Found'?" MY opinion is, Log it if you're sure you found it. Next time, put a piece of paper in it if you have one, put your name on it and rehide it where you think it goes. If you have nothing that can serve as a temporary log, then explain that in your 'Found' log. Ask the next seeker to bring paper. Then, follow everyone else's advice. File a NM. Send a message to the CO telling him where you hid it. If you think it should be archived, follow up with a NA log and work with your reviewer on options to physically get rid of it if he or she agrees. If it's AT ALL convenient for you, then that last one's important. Quote Link to comment
DaBigKahuna Posted December 20, 2013 Author Share Posted December 20, 2013 In particular, your analysis of the cacher's status and his record should have nothing to do with it. What would you do if the owner has a spotless record and is well known for quickly maintaining his caches? Do that. Make sure not to bias you evaluation by thinking there's some moral imperative to "clean up" a bygone cacher's last cache. The only reason for considering the COs status was weighing the possibility of having the cache maintained. If the CO was active and maintaining his caches, I'd wait to see that the maintenance had occurred and returned to the cache so I could make a proper log. Quote Link to comment
DaBigKahuna Posted December 20, 2013 Author Share Posted December 20, 2013 Thank you for all the responses. After reading all the wisdom here I think this is the course of action I'm going to take; 1. I'm going to log it as a find. I've already logged a "needs maintenance." 2. Wait a month and see if there is a response from the cache owner. 3. Barring a response otherwise. I'll log a "needs archiving." 4. After the cache is archived, I'll go pick up the container so there's no "geo junk" left. 5. I may possibly hide a cache at the same or nearby location. I've never done a hide so it will be my first. Quote Link to comment
+JL_HSTRE Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Thank you for all the responses. After reading all the wisdom here I think this is the course of action I'm going to take; 1. I'm going to log it as a find. I've already logged a "needs maintenance." 2. Wait a month and see if there is a response from the cache owner. 3. Barring a response otherwise. I'll log a "needs archiving." 4. After the cache is archived, I'll go pick up the container so there's no "geo junk" left. 5. I may possibly hide a cache at the same or nearby location. I've never done a hide so it will be my first. This exactly how I recommend handling this situation. Quote Link to comment
+stijnhommes Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 If the CO is not doing maintenance, let the cache die out. Don't do the maintenance unless a cache is VERY special and it is better for everyone if it remains. Talk to some earlier people who found it. If it was indeed the cache, log it as found. Otherwise, not. Quote Link to comment
+TeamRabbitRun Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 (edited) Edited out for redundancy. Edited December 20, 2013 by TeamRabbitRun Quote Link to comment
+L0ne.R Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 All these replies, and only one answer (from Team Tisri). The actual question was, "Can I log it as 'Found'?" MY opinion is, Log it if you're sure you found it. Next time, put a piece of paper in it if you have one, put your name on it and rehide it where you think it goes. If you have nothing that can serve as a temporary log, then explain that in your 'Found' log. Ask the next seeker to bring paper. Then, follow everyone else's advice. File a NM. Send a message to the CO telling him where you hid it. If you think it should be archived, follow up with a NA log and work with your reviewer on options to physically get rid of it if he or she agrees. If it's AT ALL convenient for you, then that last one's important. If it's an abandoned cache, why bother with putting a signed bit of paper in the rusty altoid tin? Log it as a Found and post an NA. I also recommend taking a photo of the empty container and posting it with the NA log. Quote Link to comment
+TeamRabbitRun Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 (edited) All these replies, and only one answer (from Team Tisri). The actual question was, "Can I log it as 'Found'?" MY opinion is, Log it if you're sure you found it. Next time, put a piece of paper in it if you have one, put your name on it and rehide it where you think it goes. If you have nothing that can serve as a temporary log, then explain that in your 'Found' log. Ask the next seeker to bring paper. Then, follow everyone else's advice. File a NM. Send a message to the CO telling him where you hid it. If you think it should be archived, follow up with a NA log and work with your reviewer on options to physically get rid of it if he or she agrees. If it's AT ALL convenient for you, then that last one's important. If it's an abandoned cache, why bother with putting a signed bit of paper in the rusty altoid tin? Log it as a Found and post an NA. I also recommend taking a photo of the empty container and posting it with the NA log. Here's why - it's possible that someone else will come along between the time that he found it and the time that it's archived (or maintained!). Why not allow someone else to find it whole while he pursues a final disposition? I'm not in favor of maintaining abandoned caches any more than you are, but as long as the 'end' is in-progress, why not keep in in play if it's within your ability? As long as it's documented in the log so it doesn't get used as an excuse to NOT archive it, it's a favor to the next cacher. Otherwise, HE or SHE will go through the same "What Should I Do" headache. *** Edited for typo. Edited December 20, 2013 by TeamRabbitRun Quote Link to comment
+K13 Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Log a Needs Archived! You found a rusty piece of metal with a magnet attached. Without some markings denoting it as a Geocache, it is only trash. You might assume it was the container from the prior geocache, but can you be certain? Quote Link to comment
+DanOCan Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 What would I do? Log the find. Log a NA on it. In a case like this our reviewer will normally come along, see the cache owner is MIA and disabled the cache for a period of time before archiving it. At least that takes it out of circulation so others don't waste their time. It's an empty rusty Altoids tin with no owner. This is one of those "addition by subtraction" situationa. Quote Link to comment
+TeamRabbitRun Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Log a Needs Archived! You found a rusty piece of metal with a magnet attached. Without some markings denoting it as a Geocache, it is only trash. You might assume it was the container from the prior geocache, but can you be certain? Sorry, but that makes no sense. If you don't assume you've found the proper container, then you can't assume it's not there somewhere, so you can't legitimately request that it be archived. Quote Link to comment
+L0ne.R Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 All these replies, and only one answer (from Team Tisri). The actual question was, "Can I log it as 'Found'?" MY opinion is, Log it if you're sure you found it. Next time, put a piece of paper in it if you have one, put your name on it and rehide it where you think it goes. If you have nothing that can serve as a temporary log, then explain that in your 'Found' log. Ask the next seeker to bring paper. Then, follow everyone else's advice. File a NM. Send a message to the CO telling him where you hid it. If you think it should be archived, follow up with a NA log and work with your reviewer on options to physically get rid of it if he or she agrees. If it's AT ALL convenient for you, then that last one's important. If it's an abandoned cache, why bother with putting a signed bit of paper in the rusty altoid tin? Log it as a Found and post an NA. I also recommend taking a photo of the empty container and posting it with the NA log. Here's why - it's possible that someone else will come along between the time that he found it and the time that it's archived (or maintained!). Why not allow someone else to find it whole while he pursues a final disposition? I'm not in favor of maintaining abandoned caches any more than you are, but as long as the 'end' is in-progress, why not keep in in play if it's within your ability? As long as it's documented in the log so it doesn't get used as an excuse to NOT archive it, it's a favor to the next cacher. Otherwise, HE or SHE will go through the same "What Should I Do" headache. *** Edited for typo. Too me it's still in play until the archive. I personally don't see the point of a logsheet that the owner will never check against the online log. Just saying. But I understand that many people don't consider it a find unless they sign a piece of paper, even if the cache is abandoned, the piece of paper will become mush in the next rain storm, and the CO isn't going to see the log. In this case, I think the most important thing is logging the NM, which the OP did. Personally, I would log an NA immediately since it's pretty obvious from the logs and the CO's profile that the cache has been abandoned. It would save future finders the disappointment of making a trip to find a neglected rusty old tin on a transformer next to a house. Quote Link to comment
+Don_J Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 All these replies, and only one answer (from Team Tisri). The actual question was, "Can I log it as 'Found'?" MY opinion is, Log it if you're sure you found it. Next time, put a piece of paper in it if you have one, put your name on it and rehide it where you think it goes. If you have nothing that can serve as a temporary log, then explain that in your 'Found' log. Ask the next seeker to bring paper. Then, follow everyone else's advice. File a NM. Send a message to the CO telling him where you hid it. If you think it should be archived, follow up with a NA log and work with your reviewer on options to physically get rid of it if he or she agrees. If it's AT ALL convenient for you, then that last one's important. You obviously missed post #4 Quote Link to comment
+TeamRabbitRun Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 All these replies, and only one answer (from Team Tisri). The actual question was, "Can I log it as 'Found'?" MY opinion is, Log it if you're sure you found it. Next time, put a piece of paper in it if you have one, put your name on it and rehide it where you think it goes. If you have nothing that can serve as a temporary log, then explain that in your 'Found' log. Ask the next seeker to bring paper. Then, follow everyone else's advice. File a NM. Send a message to the CO telling him where you hid it. If you think it should be archived, follow up with a NA log and work with your reviewer on options to physically get rid of it if he or she agrees. If it's AT ALL convenient for you, then that last one's important. You obviously missed post #4 My apologies - you did indeed. Quote Link to comment
+Harry Dolphin Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Would I log it? Yes. I did! Pretty darned sure the lock and lock in the woods, far off the trail was the cache container. Added piece of paper, and logged the cache. Quote Link to comment
+wmpastor Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 From what you just said, maybe you didn't find it, maybe its better hidden than you think. How do you know its missing beyond the fact you couldn't find it? I found the cache container... an altoids tin with a magnet. It was sitting out in the open and opened with nothing inside, This one's easy - insert a piece of paper in the tin to replace the missing log. Sign it before you replace it. It's a find. It's not a throwdown - although the official website says those are okay in certain circumstances - and it's not claiming a find for a missing cache. You found the cache. You replaced the log - limited maintenance that doesn't do all of the CO's work. Quote Link to comment
+J Grouchy Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 To me that's a no brainer. Archive it. Quote Link to comment
+WarNinjas Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 I would log it as a find then if I felt like it add a NA. Quote Link to comment
+baloo&bd Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Seems like a no brainer. Log a DNF and a needs archived. Quote Link to comment
+sarahmcmur Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 I recently 'found' a magnet attached to a sign, which I am certain is where the cache used to be (other geocachers reported finding this magnet too, but finding nothing more). I logged this as a DNF as the cache is not there! There's no log book, so it's not a cache. I went to check on the cache a week later to see if any maintenance had been done (incidentally there hadn't) but someone had logged it as found, stating 'I found the magnet'. Can't say I agree with that, but it takes all sorts to play the game I guess Quote Link to comment
+Mudfrog Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) Seems like a no brainer. Log a DNF and a needs archived. I halfway agree. A DNF is the appropriate log in this case but i think i would go with a NM for my next action. There's probably not much chance that anything will be done by the CO but honestly, stranger things have happened. I'd then give it a month and then file the NA if nothing was done. Edited January 6, 2014 by Mudfrog Quote Link to comment
+thebruce0 Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Interestingly, I don't think there's a 'right' and 'wrong' way - this is a great example of the different ways people play. Do you want the smiley? Log it found. Do you not care about the smiley? Log a DNF. But I think most everyone will agree that at least the NM log is required. After that, it depends on the CO's activity. Post-NM, if nothing happens it'll eventually get archived. The cache needs maintenance. That's a fact. Whether it's a find or a dnf? That's your call. The OP already posted his choices actions above, and IMO that was the best (perfectly valid and productive) route in this particular case. Quote Link to comment
+dprovan Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Seems like a no brainer. Log a DNF and a needs archived. I halfway agree. A DNF is the appropriate log in this case but i think i would go with a NM for my next action. There's probably not much chance that anything will be done by the CO but honestly, stranger things have happened. I'd then give it a month and then file the NA if nothing was done. I had a case where the NM got quick results. If the owner doesn't read each and every found log, they won't notice the "found magnet but not the cache" finds. When I "found" a cache like that and filed an NM, a few days later the cache was fixed. The CO even deleted a few found logs that admitted not finding the cache. Quote Link to comment
DaBigKahuna Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 I thought I'd give you all an update. I did eventually log a "Needs Archiving." Within a short time, the reviewer agreed and archived it. I went back and retrieved rusty Altoids container. I will be deploying a new cache at the location. Quote Link to comment
+Chief301 Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 That's how it oughtta work 👍 Quote Link to comment
+edscott Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Just reading the topic title told me that there was about a 90% chance I'd say no. Quote Link to comment
DaBigKahuna Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) Just reading the topic title told me that there was about a 90% chance I'd say no. I guess part of my question is what is considered a "find." Sounds like your opinion is that it's only a find if you sign a log book. Edited January 6, 2014 by DaBigKahuna Quote Link to comment
+edscott Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Not exactly, but usually if you have to ask the answer is no. Quote Link to comment
+thebruce0 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Not exactly, but usually if you have to ask the answer is no. If one had to ask you Otherwise, some would say sure. Others would say no. Quote Link to comment
+OZ2CPU Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 it is a general BAD attitude to stick firmly to the rule : ONLY a CO perform the maintenence, all visitors ONLY wear it down.. why not be a friend and helpfull and in general play by this rule: ALL visitors who feel stuff needs to be fixed, and can be fixed without time or money spend, should at least try to help.. My point is : 1 : replace wet log books with new dry log books = OK (some prefer you ADD a dry logbook, and leave the old wet book there too, however in some cases the old wet book could kill the new dry too fast, use common sense) 2 : replace a missing log book, incase it is missing and you found the correct container marked with geocache so you know for sure, not just guessing = OK 3 : you did not found anything at all, so you replace a new container and log book and sign it as found = NOT OK for number 3 to be ok, you need prior approval from the CO, then it is ok.. Quote Link to comment
+jellis Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 (edited) I have been watching some caches that the belong to a CO who was a kid who placed caches and didn't maintain them. Out of 4 caches one was never found, one archived for going missing in view of homes, and another one the cacher placed a week after it went live, and one near a Club that has gotten security suspicious of finders. The last two have gone missing many times and cachers keep replacing them. This is one of the replacements. Edited January 7, 2014 by jellis Quote Link to comment
+L0ne.R Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 (edited) My point is : 1 : replace wet log books with new dry log books = OK Did you see the photo of the cache? It's just junk now. Why keep it limping along? The OP did the right thing by putting it out of it's misery. This would not be a pleasant experience for most future finders. Plus the hide and area is just meh - a suburban community next to a playground and public pool (I assume public, could just be someone's house), on a transformer box. Edited January 7, 2014 by L0ne.R Quote Link to comment
+Mudfrog Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 The OP did the right thing by putting it out of it's misery. This would not be a pleasant experience for most future finders. There was a time when this was true but i don't think this is the case anymore. Too many number's cachers out these days who really don't care what the cache is or what kind of shape it is in. They're happy as long as they can claim the smiley! Quote Link to comment
+TheWeatherWarrior Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I'm OK with this one being a Found It, HOWEVER: DO NOT REPLACE CONTAINER DO NOT REPLACE LOG BOOK Do report a Needs Maintenance (or Needs Archive if a NM has been reported or it has been months since any attention given). If you feel the cache should be continued, allow the archiving process to take place and put one of your own, under your name and maintain it. I use to be more "community" maintenance but there is such a huge rash of issues arising from doing it. If you want to help in a community way, consider starting or joining a geo-trash rescue group (cachers who head to archived sites and verify and/or collect old containers and other geo-trash (and CITO a little too). THAT is the best way to help the community....inside and outside geocaching. Quote Link to comment
+dprovan Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 why not be a friend and helpfull and in general play by this rule: ALL visitors who feel stuff needs to be fixed, and can be fixed without time or money spend, should at least try to help.. Why not? Because the very idea suggests that it's OK for a CO not to visit his caches regularly. But this is also a good time to bring up that with millions of caches in the field, many COs have hundreds of them. It it reasonable to expect them to visit them regularly? Or even to visit GZ twice, for that matter? Should our attitude towards helping out be geared to this type of owner? Or should we approach the issue differently depending on who the CO is? If the latter, then where's the line between a newbie with 1 cache and a well respected owner with a thousand caches all over the world? Quote Link to comment
+JohnnyVegas Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Here's the situation. Cache has been muggled. All contents including logbook are missing. I logged it as a "Needs Maintenance." In looking at the CO account, he has not been on the website for a few years. He has six caches and all but this one have been archived. Therefore I doubt that the CO will react to my "Needs Maint." log and restock the cache. So what would you do? Do I not log because there was no logbook to sign? Do I log a find without a signature? Post a should be archived it looks like the CO is no longer geocaching Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.