+georgeandmary Posted April 4, 2002 Posted April 4, 2002 I've often heard people say that it doesn't count as a cache unless you sign the log book, and I agree. So check this out. Today we, mary and I, found a cache and started to write in the log. While writing in the log my daughter yells out, "Look another one!". So we open the second cache and it explains that it's the replacment for the original cache that came up missing. So we logged that one too. Two caches, two log books. Someone must have returned the original cache. What do you think, one or two finds? george Quote
+georgeandmary Posted April 4, 2002 Author Posted April 4, 2002 quote:Originally posted by Zuckerruebensirup: Were there one or two cache pages? One cache page. george Quote
Zuckerruebensirup Posted April 4, 2002 Posted April 4, 2002 If it were me, I'd post one find, but definitely mention the second cache in my log. Maybe you could even offer to move one of them, and make a second cache out of it. (Or maybe the owner will want to do so themselves.) On the other hand, as you pointed out, you did sign TWO separate log books. The consensus seems to be that if you find a cache location, even with a high degree of confidence that you have the spot, that if the cache has gone missing (or destroyed, and you've found pieces of it on the trail), that if you can't sign the book it's not a find. Using that logic, I could see how you could justify a second find. (I guess I'm not much help here. ) Quote
Zuckerruebensirup Posted April 4, 2002 Posted April 4, 2002 If it were me, I'd post one find, but definitely mention the second cache in my log. Maybe you could even offer to move one of them, and make a second cache out of it. (Or maybe the owner will want to do so themselves.) On the other hand, as you pointed out, you did sign TWO separate log books. The consensus seems to be that if you find a cache location, even with a high degree of confidence that you have the spot, that if the cache has gone missing (or destroyed, and you've found pieces of it on the trail), that if you can't sign the book it's not a find. Using that logic, I could see how you could justify a second find. (I guess I'm not much help here. ) Quote
+oregone Posted April 4, 2002 Posted April 4, 2002 Post a link to this cache, will ya? From your description, it sounds like a geocacher's dream--finding two in the same spot. all rights reserved, all wrongs reversed Quote
BassoonPilot Posted April 5, 2002 Posted April 5, 2002 quote:Originally posted by georgeandmary: Today we, mary and I, found a cache and started to write in the log. While writing in the log my daughter yells out, "Look another one!". So we open the second cache and it explains that it's the replacment for the original cache that came up missing. I guess this disproves the theory that the place an object is found was the last place the seeker looked. I would log it as one find. Quote
BassoonPilot Posted April 5, 2002 Posted April 5, 2002 quote:Originally posted by georgeandmary: Today we, mary and I, found a cache and started to write in the log. While writing in the log my daughter yells out, "Look another one!". So we open the second cache and it explains that it's the replacment for the original cache that came up missing. I guess this disproves the theory that the place an object is found was the last place the seeker looked. I would log it as one find. Quote
+CacheCows Posted April 6, 2002 Posted April 6, 2002 If the cache owner had intentionally placed two caches (either a multi-cache, multi-stage, or bonus/optional cache) and their instructions said to make two logs, then fine, log both. From your description, that's not the case here, so a single log is appropriate. The cache owner on the other hand may be so happy at your report that the original cache is back may in appreciation tell you to make the second log, that's at their discretion. _________________________________ Member: Quote
+georgeandmary Posted April 6, 2002 Author Posted April 6, 2002 quote:Originally posted by Team CacheCows of Wisconsin: If the cache owner had intentionally placed two caches (either a multi-cache, multi-stage, or bonus/optional cache) and their instructions said to make two logs, then fine, log both. From your description, that's not the case here, so a single log is appropriate. The cache owner on the other hand may be so happy at your report that the original cache is back may in appreciation tell you to make the second log, that's at their discretion. _________________________________ Member:http://www.wi-geocaching.com I left it up to the cache owner to decide. I told him to delete on of my logs of he wanted. I just thought it was an interesting situation. george Quote
+Ttepee Posted April 6, 2002 Posted April 6, 2002 Just for curiosity's sake, did the reappearing cache have any notes in the log detailing it's adventure while lost in action? Non-cacher find??? Quote
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.