Question for CO's - helping or hurting?

February 4, 2015

Like many of us, I sometimes come across caches that are in need of some lovin'. I've taken to keeping spare log sheets and plastic baggies in my car, and when I come across a log that is full or wet, I add a clean, blank log. I make sure to leave the old log (sometimes putting it in a new baggie if it's wet) since my understanding is that etiquette says to never take an old log. I currently work in a job where part of my work requires disposing of old medication bottles, and rather than throw them away, I've been offering them to local cachers. I was thinking about keeping some on hand for when I go out caching and come across containers that are missing lids, or have been completely crushed (like my 200th find - no lid, had to pop the container back into shape just to get the log out, and there were holes in the container, making everything wet.) and replacing them with sound containers.

My question is, as a cache owner, would someone doing this be more helpful or hurtful? I'm not talking about dropping a cache when I fail to find it and assume that it has gone missing, but rather, when I have found the cache and it is in dire condition. I intend to inform the CO of the condition and let them know what I did so that they can replace my container if they'd like. I want to be helpful but I definitely don't want to step on any toes or disrespect the efforts of a CO, so if replacing jenky containers would be more problematic than helpful, I won't start doing this. I also would only replace them with similar containers, like pill bottle with another pill bottle, not a lock-and-lock with a pill bottle or anything like that. I appreciate any feedback!

February 4, 2015

I would greatly appreciate such help. However, lot of my containers is camouflaged, and I don't expect that everybody takes woodland tape, scissors and a roll of thin, green wire when caching

2.6k · February 4, 2015

You will get a variety of answers.

The way I see it, there are 3 cases:

1. Active owner, who appreciates help: The owner is active (and would fix it themselves in a reasonable time once the problem has been pointed out), but they appreciate help, even if it is just a temporary fix. (This is where I personally am).

2. Active owner, who doesn't appreciate help. There are owners who prefer to fix it themselves. They just want to be told there is an issue and they will fix it.

3. Inactive owner: Here you will also get mixed opinion, and it can depend on the cache. On the one hand, if the owner isn't active, it might be best to have it archived. But e.g. if the cache is a particularly old one, you might want to fix it to keep it going.

The problem is it is hard for you to tell in the field which sort of owner you are dealing with. If you have internet access you might be able to spot case 3 - if the problems have been reported for months/years and no response from the CO, then it is probably case 3. But between case 1 and 2; unless you ask in advance or know the owner, you wont't know. So you can take a chance and fix it, you might get a thank you, or you might get a "no thank you".

9.2k · February 4, 2015

Also the Active/Inactive owner.

Is still caching/finding, and maybe still placing caches, but doesn't carry out maintenance on their already placed caches. (But is more than happy for someone else to do the work...)

February 4, 2015

Also the Active/Inactive owner.

Is still caching/finding, and maybe still placing caches, but doesn't carry out maintenance on their already placed caches. (But is more than happy for someone else to do the work...)

+1

7.5k · February 4, 2015

In the words of ClanRiffster..."Don't be a crappy cache enabler." It may be better to help the community by posting NMs and/or NAs.

Edited February 4, 2015 by L0ne.R

7.4k · February 4, 2015

It's not wise to do this for a cache owner you don't know. Not necessarily because you're "enabling," but because you are stepping on someone's toes.

7.5k · February 4, 2015

Our caches all have quality containers to protect the contents. If there's a problem I really appreciate it when someone logs a Needs Maintenance. And gives some detail in the log about what the problem is - full log, wet contents, moldy logbook, etc. We have a reputation for providing good cache experiences which includes dry contents. I want to know asap if the container is not doing it's job (or something happened to compromise the seal) so I can get out there asap to fix it and make the visit pleasant for the next finder.

Things that I do appreciate is a wipe down of the contents if it's damp in the container, a slip of paper left to tide the cache over for a few days. But most important I want the NM or at least mention the condition of the cache in the find log. Do not add a logsheet and then not tell me that the handmade logbook that I made for the cache is full or wet or moldy. I don't want people thinking I'm a lazy cache owner that doesn't care.

Plus the NM feature helps to weed out caches that have been abandoned or have owners that could care less about maintenance. It's important in the clean up process. It's good for the game and the community.

Edited February 4, 2015 by L0ne.R

3.8k · February 4, 2015

As a cache owner, I want he caches how I want them. If I wanted it with whatever container you're replacing it with, I'd have used that container in the first place. Plus it's my opinion that if someone is looking for my cache, they want to find my cache, not yours at my location. And what if I decide to not replace or fix it? What if my cache really is there in good shape and you found something else? Let me do it, unless I ask you to do it.

February 4, 2015

In the words of ClanRiffster..."Don't be a crappy cache enabler." It may be better to. Help the community by posting NMs and/or NAs.

However, if it is some sort of "special" cache (lonely, old, one important for the numbers, etc.) even if abandonded and forgotten....some here would expect it to be maintained by the finders. Even if that means a large sized cache becomes a small or micro replacement over time. Or, the log is continually replaced/added to because nobody replaces a leaky container, but still needs the "log" for their numbers (their sig is in there, that's all that counts). So you end up with a huge pile of about ten - fifteen lumps of wet pulp over time. And god forbid you put a NA or NM on a particular cache that someone in the community "loves" or is somehow "attached" to...you will be labeled a cache cop or worse.

13.7k · February 4, 2015

I think it a good idea to put out a few caches of your own, using those pill bottles you're doling out to others (and thinking of replacing caches with).

I personally wouldn't want someone doing anything other than a light wipe if dirt or moisture on a lid, or pull a leaf out.

I respond to mention on logs and don't wait for NM.

But as in most places these days, there's a few around my area who'd be more than happy to let you do all their maintenance for them...

3.2k · February 4, 2015

I appreciate it when someone does some minor repairs to a cache of mine to keep it findable until my time schedule or the weather allows me to get there. I currently have two to check, but if anyone wants to dig in the snow, or climb an icy cliff they are there and ready to find... or wait a couple weeks and they will again be exactly as they were when I placed them.

7.5k · February 4, 2015

In the words of ClanRiffster..."Don't be a crappy cache enabler." It may be better to. Help the community by posting NMs and/or NAs.

However, if it is some sort of "special" cache (lonely, old, one important for the numbers, etc.) even if abandonded and forgotten....some here would expect it to be maintained by the finders. Even if that means a large sized cache becomes a small or micro replacement over time. Or, the log is continually replaced/added to because nobody replaces a leaky container, but still needs the "log" for their numbers (their sig is in there, that's all that counts). So you end up with a huge pile of about ten - fifteen lumps of wet pulp over time. And god forbid you put a NA or NM on a particular cache that someone in the community "loves" or is somehow "attached" to...you will be labeled a cache cop or worse.

So true. The statistics page, grid filling and challenge caches have done a disservice to the game. It's all about the numbers. Throwdowns are sanctioned. Anything older than 5 years gets special status and deemed untouchable by NMs/NAs and even DNFs.

Many people who claim to be helping the community by "fixing" caches really are motivated by the numbers: smileys, grid filling, map filling, qualifying for challenges. Not saying the OP falls under the category since he's questioning whether helping caches may hurt the game.

7.5k · February 4, 2015

I'm on a roll here. This topic always gets me riled up. Here's another thing that cheeses me off. Cache owners who are quite active but never maintain their cache and rarely maintain their cache listing. Their cache is a complete moldy mess. Multiple logs reporting the problem. Multiple logs saying they could not sign the log. No response from the owner yet he plants more power trails and finds time to rack up the numbers. Then someone comes along and adds a new logsheet and lets the CO know that there's a sheet for people to sign. For a lazy CO this means he can continue to ignore it and the cache will probably not grab the reviewers attention. How much fun is it to find a cache that's too gross to touch? Has the finder who added the logbook really made this cache more enjoyable for the next finder? They are going to have to handle the baggie that was resting in that mold for days/weeks/months.

Edited February 4, 2015 by L0ne.R

7.5k · February 4, 2015

As a cache owner, I'll take care of the problem as soon as you report it, so you don't need to.

5.7k · February 4, 2015

As a cache owner, I'll take care of the problem as soon as you report it, so you don't need to.

Same here. Post your log and let me maintain my own geocaches.

15.3k · February 4, 2015

I would greatly appreciate such help. However, lot of my containers is camouflaged, and I don't expect that everybody takes woodland tape, scissors and a roll of thin, green wire when caching

Yeah, I'd appreciate an extra log when mine is full, until I can get out there with a proper replacement. And I carry extra weatherproof logsheets myself. I also carry a few other supplies to help with minor repairs.

But replacing the container is something else. And my caches have all had custom camouflage, and a generic container would not have worked for the location anyway.

February 5, 2015

I probably end up erring on the side of too much help, to be honest. I've cleaned out quite a few caches, baggies, and logs. Mostly stuff that just saves a CO from that one extra trip. I do make sure to mention it in the log, of course. I have not replaced actual containers, as I feel that's when you get to the point of either enabling an inactive or lazy owner. In the spirit of exceptions, I'm thinking of taking a new container out when I go to find a very old cache nearby that has a recent note of animal abuse. I might, or not. I'll see what it looks like.

As a CO, I'd love someone adding a new log until I could get out there. I do my best, but I have two that were archived because they just kept disappearing and I couldn't keep up with the replacements. That was probably a good thing, because it was a lot of time to run out there every time someone said it was gone.

7.4k · February 5, 2015

As a CO, I'd love someone adding a new log until I could get out there. I do my best, but I have two that were archived because they just kept disappearing and I couldn't keep up with the replacements. That was probably a good thing, because it was a lot of time to run out there every time someone said it was gone.

Adding a new log, or a new cache?

If your cache keeps disappearing, it's in a bad place.

February 5, 2015

As a CO, I'd love someone adding a new log until I could get out there. I do my best, but I have two that were archived because they just kept disappearing and I couldn't keep up with the replacements. That was probably a good thing, because it was a lot of time to run out there every time someone said it was gone.

Adding a new log, or a new cache?

If your cache keeps disappearing, it's in a bad place.

Just adding a new log. I let the two go that kept disappearing, and I'm better off for it. One was in a great historical location and was a great cache, but was never going to last more than a couple months at a time.

February 5, 2015

I would prefer to be notified if any of my caches needed maintenance, including a replacement log, but if a finder replaced a full log, I wouldn't get in a twist about it. I would not be happy if someone took it upon themselves to replace one of my containers.

All but one of my hides is within minutes of my home so I tend to do a check when someone logs just a DNF - as I did this morning only to discover that unauthorised works at GZ had resulted in the destruction of my cache. Same works also changed the structure of the hide, rendering it useless for a replacement so I have archived that cache.

February 5, 2015

As a cache owner, I'll take care of the problem as soon as you report it, so you don't need to.

This is my stance, also. I expect (and would prefer) to maintain my own caches.

I used to carry duct tape, spare logs, baggies, etc. Now I cache with a pen only. If the log is wet, it gets a NM.

February 5, 2015

I travel with spare zip-locks and O-rings. If that saves a CO a trip I don't mind helping. The new 'rings/bags can stop water damage before it happens. Major cache reconstruction would be another issue.

I have done cache replacements a few times for people I know, though. For example, I arrived at one to see it had fallen out of its perch and had been run over by a lawnmower. I replaced it with a similar container, notified the CO and he was quite happy that I'd saved him a trip. Another time I replaced a bison that had buggered up threads and got a Thank-you for that, too.

Edited February 5, 2015 by BikeBill

1.4k · February 5, 2015

If you had a container close to the one I placed and mine was broken I wouldn't mind at all if you changed it out and let me know so I can go fix it when I got a chance to do so. I know others have other opinions.

We have made many friends in this game over the years and they will sometimes help out on our hides as they know we are cool. Not that we wont do it but we like to place some out on some crazy hard hikes. If they are already out there and can change it out and save us the hike all the better. We have one that is crazy hard to get to and requires a really low negative tide to get to. It goes missing occasionally. We have replaced it probably 3 times over the years. A local cacher who works with sheet metal and liked the hide location came up with some crazy cool hide and replaced it for us. Everyone who finds it logs about how cool it is. We haven't seen it yet but it was a really cool thing he did for us.

I guess it all depends on the CO.

February 5, 2015

Thank you all for your replies! I don't want to step on any toes and I'm not so much concerned about numbers and challenges - my general life philosophy is to leave the world a better place than I found it, and when it comes to the game, if I can help out and save someone the time and trouble, I would like to. I hadn't considered the aspect of enabling lazy CO's. But it seems the majority here prefer to do their own maintenance, so I'll hold off on replacing containers.

Incidentally, I posted this question to my local caching group to get a better feel for some of the area CO's - hadn't thought of that before I posted here! I'm still newish to the area and while I've been trying to go to events, I haven't gotten to know more than a couple of the local geocachers much, so I can't judge what anyone would want done with damaged containers.

I really appreciate the feedback! I'm still learning about geocaching and I appreciate that whenever I've posed a question here, everyone's been pretty quick and mostly respectful about responding!

7.5k · February 5, 2015

Incidentally, I posted this question to my local caching group to get a better feel for some of the area CO's - hadn't thought of that before I posted here! I'm still newish to the area and while I've been trying to go to events, I haven't gotten to know more than a couple of the local geocachers much, so I can't judge what anyone would want done with damaged containers.

Good idea. The problems that have been mentioned here about helping out other COs go away when you can call the CO and ask them if they'd like you to fix or replace their cache. Some people in my area see a DNF on a cache they're going to look for and ask the CO in advance if they should replace it and, if so, with what.

The general question you asked was about an arbitrary cache. If you're helping out a friend, then it's entirely between you and your friend.

3.6k · February 6, 2015

Remember this subject has been brought up many times.

With me log replacement due to wet or full log I don't mind. But if the cache is missing I prefer to replace it myself or ask one of my many good friends who found it already and live near the caches to help me out if I can't get over there.

Reason is the multiple caches left behind cause the cachers thinks it's missing. Just love those logs that say that they found another cache there.

And especially if the cache is creative, cammoed or just fits the place.

February 6, 2015

I appreciate a descriptive NM log and would rather arrange the rest by myself.

February 6, 2015

For me - If logbook is full, and you have a new to replace - just do it

7.4k · February 6, 2015

For me - If logbook is full, and you have a new to replace - just do it

Or just put an old receipt in and sign that. Who cares! Do whatever you want, cache owner be damned!

1.4k · February 7, 2015

Remember this subject has been brought up many times.

With me log replacement due to wet or full log I don't mind. But if the cache is missing I prefer to replace it myself or ask one of my many good friends who found it already and live near the caches to help me out if I can't get over there.

Reason is the multiple caches left behind cause the cachers thinks it's missing. Just love those logs that say that they found another cache there.

And especially if the cache is creative, cammoed or just fits the place.

I still have your duplicate container I found left at one of your caches I need to get back to you! I forgot to bring it to the caccbag event I seen you at after.

6.1k · February 8, 2015

For me - If logbook is full, and you have a new to replace - just do it

Or just put an old receipt in and sign that. Who cares! Do whatever you want, cache owner be damned!

Yeah, why not? I've done it.

The reality is that most cache owners are not active, and the majority who have joined are not participating anymore. If one needs to be fixed, then in most cases it should be fine. Upload a photo of the log sheet and add a receipt as a replacement if it needs it. Most cache owners appreciate it. Repairing a cache is much different than adding a new one without knowing much about the old one.

The other option is to let it degrade and turn into mush until it finally gets archived into litter. If we archive caches with inactive owners, the majority would be gone. However if the cache owner is simply expecting community maintenance right from the start, then there's a problem.

7.4k · February 9, 2015

For me - If logbook is full, and you have a new to replace - just do it

Or just put an old receipt in and sign that. Who cares! Do whatever you want, cache owner be damned!

Yeah, why not? I've done it.

The reality is that most cache owners are not active, and the majority who have joined are not participating anymore. If one needs to be fixed, then in most cases it should be fine. Upload a photo of the log sheet and add a receipt as a replacement if it needs it. Most cache owners appreciate it. Repairing a cache is much different than adding a new one without knowing much about the old one.

The other option is to let it degrade and turn into mush until it finally gets archived into litter. If we archive caches with inactive owners, the majority would be gone. However if the cache owner is simply expecting community maintenance right from the start, then there's a problem.

Given how many people are constantly complaining about not being able to place caches due to saturation and proximity issues, I am pretty confident that archival in most of these cases would just mean space for a new cache owner to use the same spot. There are very few caches worthy of life support. Even the good ones can be re-listed by someone who is still playing.

6.1k · February 9, 2015

For me - If logbook is full, and you have a new to replace - just do it

Or just put an old receipt in and sign that. Who cares! Do whatever you want, cache owner be damned!

Yeah, why not? I've done it.

The reality is that most cache owners are not active, and the majority who have joined are not participating anymore. If one needs to be fixed, then in most cases it should be fine. Upload a photo of the log sheet and add a receipt as a replacement if it needs it. Most cache owners appreciate it. Repairing a cache is much different than adding a new one without knowing much about the old one.

The other option is to let it degrade and turn into mush until it finally gets archived into litter. If we archive caches with inactive owners, the majority would be gone. However if the cache owner is simply expecting community maintenance right from the start, then there's a problem.

Given how many people are constantly complaining about not being able to place caches due to saturation and proximity issues, I am pretty confident that archival in most of these cases would just mean space for a new cache owner to use the same spot. There are very few caches worthy of life support. Even the good ones can be re-listed by someone who is still playing.

In different areas, the approach should vary. A cache dense area with constant visitors should certainly have finders task the CO to fix it. In other places the archival would result in an empty hole in the map for several years. Why task an inactive CO to hike several miles to the middle of nowhere when an easy fix is available?

3.3k · February 9, 2015

I appreciate basic mantenance (new log etc.) But please don't replace the container because you can't find the cache. And don't put a baggie in my cache. Bagies are probably the largest sourse of wet caches. They often get caught in the lid's seal, letting in water. A cache in good order will keep water out. No need for a bag.

7.5k · February 9, 2015

I appreciate basic maintenance (new log etc.) But please don't replace the container because you can't find the cache. And don't put a baggie in my cache. Baggies are probably the largest source of wet caches. They often get caught in the lid's seal, letting in water. A cache in good order will keep water out. No need for a bag.

Interesting because that's happened to my caches. I use authentic Lock & Locks (not a dollar store knock-off). They do a great job of keeping the contents dry. It's happened a few times that a baggie got caught in the seal and the contents ended up soaked, so I stopped using a baggie around the logbook. But often when I do a maintenance check the log is in a baggie. I realize they are well-meaning finders, they don't realize why it can be a problem. Especially baggies that are too big and need to have the air squeezed out and folded just right to get back in the container. So this is a good public service announcement that if there's no baggie covering the logbook, it may be as the owner intended.

3.3k · February 9, 2015

I appreciate basic maintenance (new log etc.) But please don't replace the container because you can't find the cache. And don't put a baggie in my cache. Baggies are probably the largest source of wet caches. They often get caught in the lid's seal, letting in water. A cache in good order will keep water out. No need for a bag.

Interesting because that's happened to my caches. I use authentic Lock & Locks (not a dollar store knock-off). They do a great job of keeping the contents dry. It's happened a few times that a baggie got caught in the seal and the contents ended up soaked, so I stopped using a baggie around the logbook. But often when I do a maintenance check the log is in a baggie. I realize they are well-meaning finders, they don't realize why it can be a problem. Especially baggies that are too big and need to have the air squeezed out and folded just right to get back in the container. So this is a good public service announcement that if there's no baggie covering the logbook, it may be as the owner intended.

Not to mention, 87% of baggies that I see have holes in them. So they are doing nothing to help, but have the potential to ruin the cache.

February 10, 2015

I suspect most who take the time to do maintenance have good intentions and would prefer to see a cache survive than die. While I've not yet hidden any, I always carry a GeoCache kit with me, that contain necessary supplies and TOTT. And, I tend to spruce up a damaged cache I find.

I recently received this email after posting a find that found in a flood zone that I dried up and bagged. I considered replacing the container, but with what I had, it would have required moving the cache, so, after drying off the exiting damaged log, and bagging it, I added a new bagged log, a piece of swag, and I put the whole container in a lock seal baggie and returned it to where I found it.

Hi,

Just wanted to say thank you for helping out my geocache (Cache name removed by me). I don't live as close to that cache as I use to and the last time I drove past I was in a rush. Glad there are still geocachers out there who will help each other out rather then just complain.

Thanks again,(Name redacted by me)

Ultimately, I think, a cache is the CO's responsibility. But, even as a newbie, I can see that there are many that have been left out there to survive as best they can. CO move away. No one to adopt the cache. As with every activity, there will be those who appreciate help and those who complain about being helped. We call it life. It is what it is.

February 10, 2015

I appreciate basic mantenance (new log etc.) But please don't replace the container because you can't find the cache. And don't put a baggie in my cache. Bagies are probably the largest sourse of wet caches. They often get caught in the lid's seal, letting in water. A cache in good order will keep water out. No need for a bag.

Replacing a container because one can't find the cache is an entirely different topic that providing maintenance, and is not a good idea. Good grief... if I "replaced" a container for every one of my DNFs, there would be some major confusion out there.

February 10, 2015

I try not to be a geosnob, but the whole idea of throwdowns makes me a bit twitchy. If I can't find a cache but have found a pretty obvious spot for a 1/1 or something else easy, I'll log a DNF with something along the lines of, "not sure if the cache is gone or I'm just missing it..." so that the CO can check on it.

My concern is more for the containers that I find, but that are badly damaged (smashed pill bottles, containers missing lids so the contents are getting wet, etc.) After raising this topic with my local geocaching group, I'm keeping some containers in my car, but certainly would never replace one unless I found the container and it was just brutalized beyond usefulness.

7.5k · February 10, 2015

My concern is more for the containers that I find, but that are badly damaged (smashed pill bottles, containers missing lids so the contents are getting wet, etc.) After raising this topic with my local geocaching group, I'm keeping some containers in my car, but certainly would never replace one unless I found the container and it was just brutalized beyond usefulness.

If they are badly damaged, it's likely they've been that way for some time and the cache owner is non-responsive.

Replacing abandoned caches, or caches of owners who do not maintain their caches sends a message:

Place 'em and forget 'em is OK.

Abandoned cache listings is OK.

Using junk containers is OK.

Replacing an abandoned cache and abandoning the replacement is OK.

Litter is OK.

NMs and NAs serve a greater purpose and help promote responsibility and quality.

7.4k · February 10, 2015

I appreciate basic maintenance (new log etc.) But please don't replace the container because you can't find the cache. And don't put a baggie in my cache. Baggies are probably the largest source of wet caches. They often get caught in the lid's seal, letting in water. A cache in good order will keep water out. No need for a bag.

Interesting because that's happened to my caches. I use authentic Lock & Locks (not a dollar store knock-off). They do a great job of keeping the contents dry. It's happened a few times that a baggie got caught in the seal and the contents ended up soaked, so I stopped using a baggie around the logbook. But often when I do a maintenance check the log is in a baggie. I realize they are well-meaning finders, they don't realize why it can be a problem. Especially baggies that are too big and need to have the air squeezed out and folded just right to get back in the container. So this is a good public service announcement that if there's no baggie covering the logbook, it may be as the owner intended.

Not to mention, 87% of baggies that I see have holes in them. So they are doing nothing to help, but have the potential to ruin the cache.

They get holes in them because people put the pencils in them!

I see the issue with the baggies getting stuck in the seal, and it's something I try to be mindful of, but I have rarely seen a container that is good enough to survive our winters without letting in a bit of water, and baggies do protect the logbook.

13.7k · February 10, 2015

My concern is more for the containers that I find, but that are badly damaged (smashed pill bottles, containers missing lids so the contents are getting wet, etc.) After raising this topic with my local geocaching group, I'm keeping some containers in my car, but certainly would never replace one unless I found the container and it was just brutalized beyond usefulness.

If they are badly damaged, it's likely they've been that way for some time and the cache owner is non-responsive.

Replacing abandoned caches, or caches of owners who do not maintain their caches sends a message:

Place 'em and forget 'em is OK.

Abandoned cache listings is OK.

Using junk containers is OK.

Replacing an abandoned cache and abandoning the replacement is OK.

Litter is OK.

NMs and NAs serve a greater purpose and help promote responsibility and quality.

+1

The last thing I'd ever do is replace a smashed pill bottle with another one.

Last, as in after replacing the entire ET with ammo cans...

13.7k · February 10, 2015

I appreciate basic maintenance (new log etc.) But please don't replace the container because you can't find the cache. And don't put a baggie in my cache. Baggies are probably the largest source of wet caches. They often get caught in the lid's seal, letting in water. A cache in good order will keep water out. No need for a bag.

Interesting because that's happened to my caches. I use authentic Lock & Locks (not a dollar store knock-off). They do a great job of keeping the contents dry. It's happened a few times that a baggie got caught in the seal and the contents ended up soaked, so I stopped using a baggie around the logbook. But often when I do a maintenance check the log is in a baggie. I realize they are well-meaning finders, they don't realize why it can be a problem. Especially baggies that are too big and need to have the air squeezed out and folded just right to get back in the container. So this is a good public service announcement that if there's no baggie covering the logbook, it may be as the owner intended.

Not to mention, 87% of baggies that I see have holes in them. So they are doing nothing to help, but have the potential to ruin the cache.

They get holes in them because people put the pencils in them!

I see the issue with the baggies getting stuck in the seal, and it's something I try to be mindful of, but I have rarely seen a container that is good enough to survive our winters without letting in a bit of water, and baggies do protect the logbook.

+1

We even tried those tiny golf pencils and folks still managed to puncture 'em.

We took them out and folks (who think they're helping...) put 'em right back in.

7.5k · February 10, 2015

I appreciate basic maintenance (new log etc.) But please don't replace the container because you can't find the cache. And don't put a baggie in my cache. Baggies are probably the largest source of wet caches. They often get caught in the lid's seal, letting in water. A cache in good order will keep water out. No need for a bag.

Interesting because that's happened to my caches. I use authentic Lock & Locks (not a dollar store knock-off). They do a great job of keeping the contents dry. It's happened a few times that a baggie got caught in the seal and the contents ended up soaked, so I stopped using a baggie around the logbook. But often when I do a maintenance check the log is in a baggie. I realize they are well-meaning finders, they don't realize why it can be a problem. Especially baggies that are too big and need to have the air squeezed out and folded just right to get back in the container. So this is a good public service announcement that if there's no baggie covering the logbook, it may be as the owner intended.

Not to mention, 87% of baggies that I see have holes in them. So they are doing nothing to help, but have the potential to ruin the cache.

They get holes in them because people put the pencils in them!

I see the issue with the baggies getting stuck in the seal, and it's something I try to be mindful of, but I have rarely seen a container that is good enough to survive our winters without letting in a bit of water, and baggies do protect the logbook.

+1

We even tried those tiny golf pencils and folks still managed to puncture 'em.

We took them out and folks (who think they're helping...) put 'em right back in.

And the problem happens often the baggie they use is too big for the container. If the air needs to be squeezed out and the baggie folded in order to get it back in the cache, then the likelihood that the baggie will get caught in the seal increases.

7.4k · February 10, 2015

+1

We even tried those tiny golf pencils and folks still managed to puncture 'em.

We took them out and folks (who think they're helping...) put 'em right back in.

I think it's just something that can't be helped. It's kind of a lose-lose situation - either the writing utensils are banging around the bottom of the cache getting wrecked themselves, or they're putting holes in the baggy.

It's just one of those things that you can't get too peeved about or you'll go crazy.

Question for CO's - helping or hurting?

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

Join the conversation