Replacing logs

[Rat_Tails]

So I've been doing some reading and I see that sometimes if a log is wet or damaged, a geohelper (helpful geocacher ) will sometimes replace the log. Obv the original one is wet and damaged so the log is not readable anymore, but what about if a log is full (or wet, but not entirely unreadable). Will people replace it then as well? What if the cache owner wants to keep the log and read the entries?

 

What's the protocol for this? Is there any?

 

Sorry if it's a silly question.

[+CanadianRockies]

So I've been doing some reading and I see that sometimes if a log is wet or damaged, a geohelper (helpful geocacher ) will sometimes replace the log. Obv the original one is wet and damaged so the log is not readable anymore, but what about if a log is full (or wet, but not entirely unreadable). Will people replace it then as well? What if the cache owner wants to keep the log and read the entries?

 

What's the protocol for this? Is there any?

Some people will never replace logs, feeling it discourages owners from doing proper maintenance.

 

If the cache only has enough room for a single log, then I will remove the old log and replace it. But I also always tell the cache owner that I'm willing to send them the old log (in case they want to read the entries). So far, nobody has ever asked me to send an old log. After a month or so, I toss the old log.

[+briansnat]

I would never replace a log without prior permission from the CO. I might add one if needed, but I'll never remove the old one.

 

As far as replacing wet logs, the log probably got wet because the container was inadequate. Add a log and it will be wet soon, so I think it's best to log a NM in the case of wet logs.

[+L0ne.R]

So I've been doing some reading and I see that sometimes if a log is wet or damaged, a geohelper (helpful geocacher ) will sometimes replace the log. Obv the original one is wet and damaged so the log is not readable anymore, but what about if a log is full (or wet, but not entirely unreadable). Will people replace it then as well? What if the cache owner wants to keep the log and read the entries?

 

What's the protocol for this? Is there any?

Some people will never replace logs, feeling it discourages owners from doing proper maintenance.

 

If the cache only has enough room for a single log, then I will remove the old log and replace it. But I also always tell the cache owner that I'm willing to send them the old log (in case they want to read the entries). So far, nobody has ever asked me to send an old log. After a month or so, I toss the old log.

 

I like it when a finder let's me know that the logbook is almost full. That gives me some time to get out to replace the logbook. If they report that it's already full I would leave a note on the cache page asking if the next finder could leave a scrap of paper until I can get there in a week or two.

 

If someone took one of my full logbooks I would not ask for it back. First, I'm female and leery of strangers asking me for my address or inviting me to come meet up. Also, what if, unbeknownst to you, you take the logbook from a cache owned by a 14 year old girl and invite her to come get the logbook or ask her for her home address so you can mail it to her. If I were her parent I would not be pleased at all about it. Second, in the olden golden days I would have been upset about losing my logbook because I see them as momentoes, there were some great logs in our books back then, now it's just a list of trailnames. No point getting it back. But still it's our logbook and I'd like it to remain in the cache. I would ask the person who took it to return it to the cache.

[+Titus1919]

I will put a new log in a cache but will not remove a full log. If I can not find room somewhere on the log and can't leave a new log I will take a pic of the log and email the CO and ask if I can still claim found and that his log is full.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

We have replaced several hundred logs and I have yet for a CO to want the old log ( got quite a few thank you mails ). IMO if the entire geocaching community would assist in helping maintain the caches that are in the field it would be a better game for everyone.

[+CanadianRockies]

If someone took one of my full logbooks I would not ask for it back. First, I'm female and leery of strangers asking me for my address or inviting me to come meet up. Also, what if, unbeknownst to you, you take the logbook from a cache owned by a 14 year old girl and invite her to come get the logbook or ask her for her home address so you can mail it to her. If I were her parent I would not be pleased at all about it. Second, in the olden golden days I would have been upset about losing my logbook because I see them as momentoes, there were some great logs in our books back then, now it's just a list of trailnames. No point getting it back. But still it's our logbook and I'd like it to remain in the cache. I would ask the person who took it to return it to the cache.

First, I offer to either send the original log to the address of their choice (perhaps a work address) or email a copy of the log.

 

Second, I've never taken a notebook type logbook, only strips of paper (e.g., nano and Bison tube logs). Most notebook logbooks never get full (usually room to squeeze in a signature somewhere) or the cache itself is big enough to hold an additional log (so I don't take the original log).

[+NeecesandNephews]

The way I handle it?? If the log is full I post a NM. I have yet to find one I could not at least get our initials on somewhere.

 

If the log is wet, I set it where it can dry a bit, or dry it under the vent in the truck while I look around the location, sign it, replace it, and post a NM.

 

I will never take an old log from a cache. I don't feel it's my place.

 

I have added sheets to some logs that were totally saturated and falling apart, but whenever I do that I put the new paper in a mini-Ziploc. I do this if I think the new paper is going to be saturated within three minutes of me leaving. Post a NM.

 

I will not replace a log in a nano. I will poste a NM and a "Write Note" if I was unable to sign, instead of a "Found it". Yep... puritan.

 

If the log is missing (and I am sure I found the actual container, i.e. a cammo'd matchstick tube suspended in a tree for instance) I will add a printed and prepared log. (GS has a file to download and print for free) I will either post a Write Note, or contact the CO by PM to let them know I have done this.

 

It has been the topic of a recent "maintenance" thread and no doubt countless others over the years, about doing maintenance on caches. The comment was made about absentee owners, and refusing to do this for them. I have to say I am guilty of having that mindset.

 

I will look up the CO online, on caches that need maintenance. (I have unlimited data access on my laptop in my personal truck, provided by my employer) If the CO is still active in the game, I will help them out by replacing missing logs, doing some upkeep on the cammo, or repairing "broken or leaking" containers. I will NOT replace a container unless I have the CO's permission FIRST.

 

Look down on me if you want, but if you were a "temp" to the game and left a trail of rabbit droppings along a track to where you disappeared over the horizon, never to be seen again... tough luck. I am not keeping your cache alive.

 

There are some caches whose owners have been gone for a while that I have added a logsheet to, or done some maintenance on, but it has been rare. I feel if I am the one doing the "saving" it's my decision what is worth "saving."

 

I refuse to do any kind of maintenance on a "power trail." Container is cracked or leaking?? Boom...NA. If you had the time to make the container up, place them all, and make the pages up, you should have the time to maintain them. After the first two smaller trails I ran, I try to avoid them. Not really a problem out here in the toolies.

 

 

[team tisri]

If someone took one of my full logbooks I would not ask for it back. First, I'm female and leery of strangers asking me for my address or inviting me to come meet up. Also, what if, unbeknownst to you, you take the logbook from a cache owned by a 14 year old girl and invite her to come get the logbook or ask her for her home address so you can mail it to her. If I were her parent I would not be pleased at all about it. Second, in the olden golden days I would have been upset about losing my logbook because I see them as momentoes, there were some great logs in our books back then, now it's just a list of trailnames. No point getting it back. But still it's our logbook and I'd like it to remain in the cache. I would ask the person who took it to return it to the cache.

First, I offer to either send the original log to the address of their choice (perhaps a work address) or email a copy of the log.

 

Second, I've never taken a notebook type logbook, only strips of paper (e.g., nano and Bison tube logs). Most notebook logbooks never get full (usually room to squeeze in a signature somewhere) or the cache itself is big enough to hold an additional log (so I don't take the original log).

 

That's the sort of approach I take too. The only time I've needed to mail a log book to someone was when I got home from a day's caching wondering what the unexpected item in my cargo pocket was, only to realise I'd brought a log book home with me.

 

Unless someone has chosen an obvious user name it's hard to know their age or gender, and if they want it posted to a work address, parent's office, friend, whatever - all are fine. Unless the user is called something like "susieage14" they could give a male or female name and nobody would be any the wiser as to whether it was the cacher, spouse, parent, whatever.

[Clan Riffster]

Sorry if it's a silly question.

Not at all! As you can see, there are about as many answers as there are posters to this thread. Each of these opinions are equally valid, as will your opinion be, once you decide on a course of action. Personally, I lean toward Briansnat's view. My experience tells me that there are, essentially, two types of containers used in this hobby. Those which suck, and those which don't. I define sucking to mean any container which does not adequately protect its contents, be it a scrap of paper, or gobs of high end swag.

 

Those who use crappy containers do so for, essentially, one of two reasons: ignorance or apathy. Either they don't know that their containers suck, or they don't care. If you make a habit of replacing soggy logs, placed by folks who don't know their containers suck, you deprive them of the chance to learn, through multiple maintenance visits, that they made a bad choice. Without this education, you increase the chances that they'll continue making poor choices. The same is true for those who don't care that they are using crappy containers. The difference is, you rob them of the consequences of their choices.

 

Don't be a crappy cache enabler.

 

On a related note, assuming I have consent from the cache owner, I will go way out of my way to fix up a quality cache.

[+fuzzybelly]

We have replaced several hundred logs and I have yet for a CO to want the old log ( got quite a few thank you mails ). IMO if the entire geocaching community would assist in helping maintain the caches that are in the field it would be a better game for everyone.

Agreed. I replace some if they're full and people have replaced mine when full. Cache maintenance was performed. You scratch may back and i'll scratch yours.

[+dprovan]

Replacing a wet log is pointless since the result will simply be a second wet log. It's ok to replace a full log if you want to, but I don't. If you replace a log and are worried about the CO wanting the contents, the easiest solution is to post pictures of it in your on-line log. In addition to providing the CO with the information you think he might want, it also lets everyone else look it over.

[Rat_Tails]

Thanks for the discussion everyone Some excellent and valid viewpoints here.

 

I totally agree on not bothering on 'crappy cache' cos the CO should sort it out.

 

Thanks guys, really appreciate the friendly feedback!

[+DragonsWest]

I've added new strips of Rite-In-Rain paper and once in a while replaced the log in a blinker, which is full (not much room to add) and emailed CO if they want the old one. Once in a while when there's a sodden notepad in a cache I've added a small strip in a bag and notified the CO their cache is now Cache Soup.

[+L0ne.R]

Personally, I lean toward Briansnat's view. My experience tells me that there are, essentially, two types of containers used in this hobby. Those which suck, and those which don't. I define sucking to mean any container which does not adequately protect its contents, be it a scrap of paper, or gobs of high end swag.

 

Those who use crappy containers do so for, essentially, one of two reasons: ignorance or apathy. Either they don't know that their containers suck, or they don't care. If you make a habit of replacing soggy logs, placed by folks who don't know their containers suck, you deprive them of the chance to learn, through multiple maintenance visits, that they made a bad choice. Without this education, you increase the chances that they'll continue making poor choices. The same is true for those who don't care that they are using crappy containers. The difference is, you rob them of the consequences of their choices.

 

Don't be a crappy cache enabler.

 

On a related note, assuming I have consent from the cache owner, I will go way out of my way to fix up a quality cache.

 

THIS! ^^^^^^

 

I don't understand why people pat themselves on the back for enabling crappy leaky plant-em-and-forget-em caches? Except that they ultimately see geocaching as a rack-up-the-numbers game and quantity trumps quality.

[+bones1]

I really look foreward to finding a full or wet log as i have replaced 761 logs since 2004, i think we all should replace logs to help the caching community, and have never yet posted a "needs maintainance" log that clutters up the cache page, but i always email the cache owner to see if they would like me to post it to them,thats only happened once. jeff=bones1.

[+TriciaG]

I've never replaced a log, mostly because I don't have them with me. One time I added a piece of notepad paper because the existing log was soup, but based on the lack of responsiveness by the CO to previous NM logs, I logged an NA since the cache was in really bad shape and the CO was AWOL.

 

I post NM whenever a cache needs maintenance. It's harmful to the geocaching community to not alert the CO that their cache needs maintenance.

 

I'm pretty much in 100% agreement with Clan Riffster in post #10.

[+NJSquirrel]

Sorry if it's a silly question.

Not at all! As you can see, there are about as many answers as there are posters to this thread. Each of these opinions are equally valid, as will your opinion be, once you decide on a course of action. Personally, I lean toward Briansnat's view. My experience tells me that there are, essentially, two types of containers used in this hobby. Those which suck, and those which don't. I define sucking to mean any container which does not adequately protect its contents, be it a scrap of paper, or gobs of high end swag.

 

Those who use crappy containers do so for, essentially, one of two reasons: ignorance or apathy. Either they don't know that their containers suck, or they don't care. If you make a habit of replacing soggy logs, placed by folks who don't know their containers suck, you deprive them of the chance to learn, through multiple maintenance visits, that they made a bad choice. Without this education, you increase the chances that they'll continue making poor choices. The same is true for those who don't care that they are using crappy containers. The difference is, you rob them of the consequences of their choices.

 

Don't be a crappy cache enabler.

 

On a related note, assuming I have consent from the cache owner, I will go way out of my way to fix up a quality cache.

 

+1

 

I've seen a NM log on a P&G for a full log and the CO posted a PM saying "You really don't expect me to replace a full log, do you?". The CO lives <5 miles from the hide. Seriously?

 

Don't enable bad caches and more importanly bad COs.

[+TheWeatherWarrior]

NEVER REPLACE THE CACHE ITSELF (aka Throw-down cache). That is just wrong.

 

90% of the time, you should only add a log/log sheet.

 

If you do remove the log, only do so if you plan of attempting to document the log. I have done so on a few caches because there were numerous logs mentioning the poor condition. Always do so with the expectation that the cache owner will want the log, and you will need to take it to them personally or mail it to them at your cost.

 

It is true that by "maintaining" a cache log will discourage the due-diligence a cache owner should do. However, just complaining is something that could be avoided. Be open to helping fellow cachers. Not every poor condition cache, but maybe a local one to home.

 

I tend to put more effort into older caches than newer ones. Newer ones likely only get another piece of paper, whereas older caches with soggy log books may have me swapping out a notebook. Sometimes I dry and photograph the log book then remove and trash it because of things like significant mold. I tend to put them in zip lock bags labeled so they can be returned to CO if they desire it (though so far, only one did). I'm the opposite, I will always want my logs and log books back.

[+justintim1999]

I'll almost always replace a bad log. I do it for two reasons. First to help out a fellow cacher. Second is I can't stand the thought of a new cacher finding a cache that is in bad shape. It's bad enough for a seasoned cacher to find a cache in bad shape but it's a real bummer for someone who's new to the game.

 

I have, in certain situations, replaced a cache container. First I have to have found the original cache container. Never replace a container just because you didn't find the original. If I have a similar container in my caching bag I will replace the broken one (or repair if it's a simple repair.) I will make sure to note in my log that "I replaced the cache with a similar container. The new container should be ok for a while or until the cache owner chooses to replace it." This lets future cachers know that the cache is ok. It also lets the cache owner know that the new container is just a temporary fix and should be replaced soon.

 

If the cache owner has not been active for some time I submit a needs archived log and try to get the cache removed so another cacher can utilize the spot.

[+chasclifton]

NEVER REPLACE THE CACHE ITSELF (aka Throw-down cache). That is just wrong.

 

Funny I was in that situation today. I signed a log. Then, some minutes later and from a little distance away, I saw the cache being muggled, i.e., stolen. It was on a public road right-of-way, not private property.

 

Evidently, he saw me sign it, drove up, investigated, and decided that it was a Bad Thing.

 

I came back down the same country road later in the day, checked the cache. Yep, gone. So I dropped a similar-size replacement. Then I went home and emailed the cache owner -- she is an active cacher in that county -- and told her the story. (No response yet.)

 

Mainly, I was mad at the muggle. I wanted to keep the cache live and avoid someone else having to post a DNF. If the owner decides to remove it permanently, that is her decision, of course. I certainly won't mind.

[+-CJ-]

I've usually done maintenance (including but not limited to adding new logbooks/logsheets) for geocaches that needed it. I used to leave old/full logbooks in containers in any situations. Nanos have always been headache because of lack of space inside them. I think I'm going to change my practice and leave old logbooks in containers only if there's enough space inside.

 

Chances are higher for me to participate if container is good, its hiding place is nice, the CO seems active/responsive and/or the cache is in the country (more time needed to do a maintenance visit).

 

Chances are little or zero if container was initially crappy (I mean, the CO himself chose such a crappy container, not that it was replaced by some visitor), its hiding place is awful, the CO seems to abandon his cache and/or the cache is within a city centre.

[+The_Incredibles_]

So I've been doing some reading and I see that sometimes if a log is wet or damaged, a geohelper (helpful geocacher ) will sometimes replace the log. Obv the original one is wet and damaged so the log is not readable anymore, but what about if a log is full (or wet, but not entirely unreadable). Will people replace it then as well? What if the cache owner wants to keep the log and read the entries?

 

What's the protocol for this? Is there any?

 

Sorry if it's a silly question.

 

I've replaced many logs for people. Usually micros, so there is no space for the old log. Typically, I will state in my log 'I have replaced the logbook for you, please let me know if you want the old one back.' Never had a CO want it back. I've had a few emails thanking me, but that's about it. Most of the times the CO is negligent, which is why the log needed replacing in the first place. Usually the replacement is long overdue by the time I got there. Occasionally, I have added a new logbook to a larger cache. In this case, there is usually space for the old logbook in which case I will leave it.