Missing Caches

[+pamap]

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I'm fairly new to this hobby and couldn't find any information on this topic. When you finally arrive at the cache site and find that the actual cache has been stolen or vandelized and you are 100% postive that you are in fact at the right place, are you permitted to take credit for a FIND? I've taken digital pictures of all these to send to the owners if they need that to authorize a FIND. Had several cases like this in the SLC, UT area just last week. Also I'm finding that the owners know that the cache is missing or removed and just post a note within the description that it will be restored soon, but it doesn't happen for weeks in most cases. Several of us don't always read the FINE print in the description before we start our adventures. Any comments / suggestions?

[+Markwell]

There are as wide of varied opinions on this as there are on which is the best GPS.

 

My personal take: no, it's not a find. In a standard cache (non-virtual) if I didn't have my hands on the logbook, I don't claim it as a find. This includes finding remnants of a cache, seeing the cache and not getting to it, etc., etc.

 

Don't worry so much about your claim for a found as you would the owner and other potential finders. If they see you're "not found" frowny face, they know that something could be up with a cache. I recently went on a few hunts while travelling and made a quick on-the-road decision not to search one because the last three were frowny faces. Turns out the cache was gone.

 

Had I seen a smily face, I would have wasted my time looking for something that wasn't there.

 

Markwell

My Geocaching Page

[Pick]

I think the decision to let geocachers log a disappeard cache is the cache owner's business. Personnally I would accept it especially if the player provides pictures or precise description.

 

It's the hider's responsability if a cache has disappeard. The player's deception not to find the cache because it's not there anymore shouldn't be punished TWICE !

 

However, once the cache is published as disappeard, then I would work on a case by case basis. If a player has printed your cache page a while ago and claims he didn't have the opportunity to see the cache report change, then I would probably accept the log.

 

In every case, both sides should keep in mind that it's just a game.

[Pick]

I think the decision to let geocachers log a disappeard cache is the cache owner's business. Personnally I would accept it especially if the player provides pictures or precise description.

 

It's the hider's responsability if a cache has disappeard. The player's deception not to find the cache because it's not there anymore shouldn't be punished TWICE !

 

However, once the cache is published as disappeard, then I would work on a case by case basis. If a player has printed your cache page a while ago and claims he didn't have the opportunity to see the cache report change, then I would probably accept the log.

 

In every case, both sides should keep in mind that it's just a game.

[+briansnat]

I'd have to say no. If it wasn't there, you didn't find it. Period. Part of the point of the sport, and the supposed goal is the finding of the cache. If you didn't find it, for whatever reason, it shouldn't count. Now if you're one of those who is out there simply to run up your number of finds. then go ahead and log it if makes you happy. I've actually where someone logged a cache that they didn't find and left an item at the site they decided that the cache should have been.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

I've had the same happen. I didn't try to log it.

 

Never Squat With Yer Spurs On

[+Jamie Z]

PAMAP,

 

You're right, this has been discussed before. Many times.

 

I think the conclusion to all of our discussion is that you can do whatever you want.

 

If I go on a hunt, and do not find the cache for whatever reason, I log a no-find.

 

Other people feel differently. In fact, I've seen a number of logs that read something like "We didn't find the cache, but we're logging this as a find because..." So, if you feel you can comfortably log a find when in fact you never actually found the thing, then go ahead. I doubt anyone will ever check up on it.

 

Also, as Markwell pointed out, a smiley face on the cache page gives the indication that the cache is still there and may mislead the cache owner and other hunters that that the cache is in good shape. Logging a no-find indicates that there may be a problem that the owner needs to check on.

 

And keep in mind that it is very difficult to be 100% sure that you were in the right spot.

 

Jamie

[+Iron Chef]

quote:

---

Originally posted by PAMAP:

....Several of us don't always read the FINE print in the description before we start our adventures. Any comments / suggestions?

---

 

A good suggestion would be to start reading the fine print then like you had mentioned, especially if it will save you a lot of time. To me, it's all a part of the preperation. Knowing where you are going and having a good idea of what you will be encountering is always helpful.

 

______________________

Iron Chef

[+VentureForth]

There is a certain aspect of 'mystery' which makes it fun to just go with the coordinates, though. I try to have up to date cache page info, but I'll try to go to the coordinates first. If I get stumped, I have the info with me.

 

Now I'll back up a little. I will check out the logs before I go and read the last one to see when it was last found and see if it was found. If I see about three frowny faces over a three month period, then I'll probably avoid that one. I can also be prepared with my CRK (Cache Repair Kit) if the last log entry says the cache is in bad shape.

 

I also try to travel with at least $10 - $20 for 'unexpecteds' like park fee, dinner, oops forgot something to trade stuff, etc.

 

---------------

Go! And don't be afraid to get a little wet!

[+park2]

I'm in the same boat. I e-mailed the owners, no response, no-one has ever found it, I drove 1.5 hrs out of my way to look for it, the cache page says it is buried ?!?, I spent 1.5 more hours there probing and metal detecting the ground, I talked to the land owners who said they never gave permission to anyone, (and I nearly got run over by 100 cows on a cattle drive), I spent 20 more minutes looking at birds with my binoculars.

 

I definately spent way more time than I have on many successful finds, I saw some gorgeous scenery, I met new people (landowners) and new cows (my dinner someday, I'm sure), so I feel about 80% comfy calling this a find.

 

By the way it is the ONLY one haven't physically found I logged as such.

 

Read all about it...

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=5590

 

Thoughts? I'll delete the log if more than 50% of you suggest I should (based on 10 or more responses)

 

Thx,

Park2

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by park2:

I'm in the same boat. I e-mailed the owners, no response, no-one has ever found it, I drove 1.5 hrs out of my way to look for it, the cache page says it is buried ?!?, I spent 1.5 more hours there probing and metal detecting the ground, I talked to the land owners who said they never gave permission to anyone, (and I nearly got run over by 100 cows on a cattle drive), ...

---

 

But you didn't find anything, or any trace of anything. That's a 'couldn't find' if ever I've seen one. The fact that the cache had never been found is irrelevant ... apparently, there were no previous searchers. In fact, several of the mitigating factors you mentioned are irrelevant.

 

The fact is, you went looking for the cache and were unsuccessful. Claiming a find on that is, in my opinion, bad sportsmanship. (Or is it "dishonest?" No, that's too strong. "Unethical?" Yeah, but that's not PC. Ah, I've got it ... it's "less than factual.")

 

You have raised three legitimate issues: you received no reply to your e-mail, permission from the landowner had not been secured before placement of the cache, and the cache is described as 'deeply buried.' If you feel strongly about it, point those issues out to Jeremy and ask him to look into it and perhaps archive the cache.

 

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on May 17, 2002 at 12:22 PM.]

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by park2:

I'm in the same boat. I e-mailed the owners, no response, no-one has ever found it, I drove 1.5 hrs out of my way to look for it, the cache page says it is buried ?!?, I spent 1.5 more hours there probing and metal detecting the ground, I talked to the land owners who said they never gave permission to anyone, (and I nearly got run over by 100 cows on a cattle drive), ...

---

 

But you didn't find anything, or any trace of anything. That's a 'couldn't find' if ever I've seen one. The fact that the cache had never been found is irrelevant ... apparently, there were no previous searchers. In fact, several of the mitigating factors you mentioned are irrelevant.

 

The fact is, you went looking for the cache and were unsuccessful. Claiming a find on that is, in my opinion, bad sportsmanship. (Or is it "dishonest?" No, that's too strong. "Unethical?" Yeah, but that's not PC. Ah, I've got it ... it's "less than factual.")

 

You have raised three legitimate issues: you received no reply to your e-mail, permission from the landowner had not been secured before placement of the cache, and the cache is described as 'deeply buried.' If you feel strongly about it, point those issues out to Jeremy and ask him to look into it and perhaps archive the cache.

 

[This message was edited by BassoonPilot on May 17, 2002 at 12:22 PM.]

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamie Z:

 

... I think the conclusion to all of our discussion is that you can do whatever you want ...

---

 

As opposed to "doing the right thing?"

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamie Z:

 

... I think the conclusion to all of our discussion is that you can do whatever you want ...

---

 

As opposed to "doing the right thing?"

[Buckaroo Banzai]

If you did not find the cache you and the on-site log book. If you were not able to log you find in that log then this cache should be recorded for your personal track record as not found.

 

If it's not one thing, then it's another...

[+unclerojelio]

I recently hunted a cache that, not only did I know I was in the right place, I could see the cache. But the climb down to it looked a bit hazardous to attempt alone; so I didn't. So since I didn't sign the logbook I didn't log this as a find. I did, however, log it as a note saying I was there. Someday I might come back with more support and log it.

 

... Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--

I took the one less traveled by, ...

 

unclerojelio[/url

[+unclerojelio]

I recently hunted a cache that, not only did I know I was in the right place, I could see the cache. But the climb down to it looked a bit hazardous to attempt alone; so I didn't. So since I didn't sign the logbook I didn't log this as a find. I did, however, log it as a note saying I was there. Someday I might come back with more support and log it.

 

... Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--

I took the one less traveled by, ...

 

unclerojelio[/url

[+inceptor]

I have 2 not founds. The first one was due to mother nature. I do not walk on water. The second one was just well hidden. I could tell I was in the right area as I could see where others had been looking. In both cases I spent several hours trying to either get there, locate the cache or find another way in. Both were in great locations that I would not have otherwise been to. I had fun with both of these too. I still logged them as no finds because I was unable to sign the log book.

 

Just MHO!

 

inceptor

North Texas Geocaching Association

[+inceptor]

I have 2 not founds. The first one was due to mother nature. I do not walk on water. The second one was just well hidden. I could tell I was in the right area as I could see where others had been looking. In both cases I spent several hours trying to either get there, locate the cache or find another way in. Both were in great locations that I would not have otherwise been to. I had fun with both of these too. I still logged them as no finds because I was unable to sign the log book.

 

Just MHO!

 

inceptor

North Texas Geocaching Association

[+Rebel]

As in kidnapped and held for ransom!

 

I've a travel bug out there that was grabbed by someone one day after it was placed. In early January.

 

Since then, it has just sat. I've sent him/her emails asking if he/she'll be sending it on it's way anytime soon. I got one answer saying it'll be on it's way soon. That was March. Since then, no answer.

 

I've noticed that the finder also has placed some caches. I'm gonna go get me one of his and hold it hostage until he releases my travel bug into the wild or returns it to the cache where he grabbed it.

 

I'll post a note, of course, on his cache page, to let people know it's being held hostage. But, I'm kinda POd about him grabbing my TB and not doing anything with it.

 

Before any sanctimonious folks wade in, I simply say: Deal with it.

 

See ya on the hunt!

[+Geo Leo]

A similar situation happened to me in that I went after a cache and found the location, but no cache. I searched everywhere (so I thought), and I was so convinced that I had found the intended hiding spot that I took several pictures so that I could email the owner and let him know that the cache had been removed.

 

I logged my visit as a 'not found,' but before I got around to sending the email, someone else logged a find.

 

I went back (despite having to repeat a roundtrip of several hours), and searched again. Sure enough, there it was (not in the location where I originally thought it should be). The coordinates were off and the location didn't match the description as well as the location that I had previously found (maybe it had been moved), but nevertheless, it was there, and I had missed it the first time.

 

Bottom line, if you don't find the box, don't log a find.

 

Geo Leo

[+park2]

On second though (and with y'alls helpful comments ) this was definately not a find. Still glad I attempted it (and glad I asked your opinions), the no permission and no reply things had me thinking.

 

Now for my next question:

How do you find a cache "buried pretty deep" ?

[+park2]

On second though (and with y'alls helpful comments ) this was definately not a find. Still glad I attempted it (and glad I asked your opinions), the no permission and no reply things had me thinking.

 

Now for my next question:

How do you find a cache "buried pretty deep" ?

[+Jamie Z]

quote:

---

Originally posted by park2:

I'll delete the log if more than 50% of you suggest I should (based on 10 or more responses)

---

P2,

 

I'm with everyone else. Not a find... and although I'm probably too late, might I suggest changing your "found" to a "not-found" or a "note" rather than deleting the log altogether. Not-founds are just as important to log as founds... I like reading the not-founds.

 

Jamie

[Travisty]

I agree with the consensus. I had my first no find lately and was pretty irritated with it I was dialed in exactly to the coordinates and spent more time triangulating and intersecting the coordinates, before just scouring every foot of the area for approximately 200 square feet. I made pretty sure that it wasn't any navigational error and then I logged it as a "not found". I spent propably too much time hunting for this one, but it was my second cache and there was no way I was going to let this get to me. So I picked up two more caches that day to compensate for not finding this one. I think it is more a reflection of the cache owner not checking up on it regularly than it is of us seekers not finding something that doesn't exist.