Jump to content

Was it a Find?


Doodad
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

Today I had a visual on the cache I was looking for, but did not remove it from it's hiding place. There were a few occupied vehicles parked about 100 feet away and in clear view of the cache. We went to dinner then returned and they were still there.

Instead of exposing the cache with likely noncachers watching we left the cache in place and did not move it.

My question is that a find, or a close but no cigar?

 

Doodad

Been there, Logged that, Got the T-shirt

Link to comment

There have been several threads on this topic in the past ... I read them, but didn't think about it too much, cause I was sure those circumstances would never happen to me. After all, if you don't sign the book, it's not really a logable find ... right?

 

Well, this weekend we did a 200 mile round trip to locate four caches. And, what did we find at one of them ... nothing ... yep, it had been vandalized. Logs said it wasn't the first time either (Shady Rest - GC4C2). However, "nothing" is not exactly a truthful statement. We found "evidence" left behind from the cache. The most compelling was the laminated sign off the side of the cache. But, no log book to sign ... darn ... now what.

 

What I did was log it as a find. Write up the story of what we found. And, asked the cache owner to delete the log if they didn't consider it a "find". This way everyone else knows that the cache is missing ... the notes say is/was visible from the trail and there were not that many good hiding spots. And, I've left the fate of my find in the hands of the cache owner ... as it should be.

 

Jeepster

- Road kill on the information highway ...

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Doodad:

Today I had a visual on the cache I was looking for, but did not remove it from it's hiding place. There were a few occupied vehicles parked about 100 feet away and in clear view of the cache. We went to dinner then returned and they were still there.

Instead of exposing the cache with likely noncachers watching we left the cache in place and did not move it.

My question is that a find, or a close but no cigar?

 

Doodad

Been there, Logged that, Got the T-shirt


 

Didn't get in there and sign the log book. It's not a find. Lurking civillians are part of the challange.

 

I found one cache in a park, with civillians. We had to sit there 10 minutes, within reach of the cache and pretend to chit chat while slyly reaching into the cache area so that no one would suspect. Inch my inch ever so closely until I had ahold of the cache. Signed the log and traded, suround my people, and they never saw.

 

george

Link to comment

I have always believed that a "find" requires signing the log book. Knowing where it is does not satisfy the requirement. Go back and sign in, then log the find.

 

Many caches are in clear sight, but are very difficult to actually get to. The cache hider obviously intends for the seeker to complete the effort before you can consider it a "find".

Link to comment

IF you can physically touch the cache with your hand then it is a find. Who cares if you actually sign the log book. My stats show Finds not signs icon_smile.gif

 

I agree with you for NOT openning it if you felt it would be compromised. I've been to a cache that was burried under a walkway with people walking 3 feet behind me as I sat there and "played with the sand". I've also been to a cache that was under a loading doc with LOTS of people around. I dicided to not dig it out as the danger of it being spotted was too great. I reached in touched it and left it where it was.

 

Rob

Mobile Cache Command

4525_1300.gif

Link to comment

IF you can physically touch the cache with your hand then it is a find. Who cares if you actually sign the log book. My stats show Finds not signs icon_smile.gif

 

I agree with you for NOT openning it if you felt it would be compromised. I've been to a cache that was burried under a walkway with people walking 3 feet behind me as I sat there and "played with the sand". I've also been to a cache that was under a loading doc with LOTS of people around. I dicided to not dig it out as the danger of it being spotted was too great. I reached in touched it and left it where it was.

 

Rob

Mobile Cache Command

4525_1300.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by mrcpu:

IF you can physically touch the cache with your hand then it is a find. Who cares if you actually sign the log book. My stats show _Finds not signs_ icon_smile.gif

 

I agree with you for NOT openning it if you felt it would be compromised.


 

Well, the originator of this thread stated he had merely a "visual" on the cache. Lots of caches have been placed so that they can be seen . . . and the adventure is finding a way to get those last few feet to the cache. To claim a find based on a "sighting" would be bogus.

 

But to counter your example directly, I can think of one excellent, and quite challenging, cache where the seeker can physically handle (but not access) the cache at the very beginning of the adventure. By your definition, one could claim a "find" on it.

 

Sighting a cache is not enough to log a find, unless that was an option presented by the cache owner. Neither is merely touching a hand to the container, if the container was intended to be opened.

 

Having access to a cache blocked by other visitors to the location is part of the game. I agree with you that a cache location must never be compromised, so in instances like this a "couldn't find" log and return visit was in order.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by mrcpu:

IF you can physically touch the cache with your hand then it is a find. Who cares if you actually sign the log book. My stats show _Finds not signs_ icon_smile.gif

 

I agree with you for NOT openning it if you felt it would be compromised.


 

Well, the originator of this thread stated he had merely a "visual" on the cache. Lots of caches have been placed so that they can be seen . . . and the adventure is finding a way to get those last few feet to the cache. To claim a find based on a "sighting" would be bogus.

 

But to counter your example directly, I can think of one excellent, and quite challenging, cache where the seeker can physically handle (but not access) the cache at the very beginning of the adventure. By your definition, one could claim a "find" on it.

 

Sighting a cache is not enough to log a find, unless that was an option presented by the cache owner. Neither is merely touching a hand to the container, if the container was intended to be opened.

 

Having access to a cache blocked by other visitors to the location is part of the game. I agree with you that a cache location must never be compromised, so in instances like this a "couldn't find" log and return visit was in order.

Link to comment

Another example of extreme circumstances making for bad precident:

 

My most recent log for Gangster’s Final Hideaway. I had the log book in my hands ready to sign. The local authority came up and indicated that it was closing time. I had to either take the cache with me to sign it and return it later (something I didn't want to do) or replace the log book without signing it, which I did.

 

This is a multistage cache with the second portion as a virtual. I'll count it as a "find" when I get to the final stage, so the point is kinda moot. However, I would venture that if I had signed the logbook, the cache would now be gone. And I was poised ready to sign the logbook pen inches from signing. A find? Or is there no variance in these rigid guidelines?

 

Markwell

My Geocaching Page

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Markwell:

Another example of extreme circumstances making for bad precident:

 

... I had the log book in my hands ready to sign. The local authority came up and indicated that it was closing time. I had to either take the cache with me to sign it and return it later (something I didn't want to do) or replace the log book without signing it, which I did.


 

Yet you had ample warning the authority was coming to rehide the cache without being seen. That's good! I had a similar experience where the only alternate was to take the cache or compromise its location. I took the cache and notified the cache owner, and made two return trips before I was able to replace it unseen.

 

As luck would have it, it was one of those caches no one had managed to snag prior to my visit, and no one has logged an attempt on since . . .

 

quote:
Originally posted by Markwell:

 

This is a multistage cache with the second portion as a virtual. I'll count it as a "find" when I get to the final stage, so the point is kinda moot. However, I would venture that if I had signed the logbook, the cache would now be gone. And I was poised ready to sign the logbook pen inches from signing. A find? Or is there no variance in these rigid guidelines?


 

So you had time to jot down coordinates for the virtual? icon_wink.gif

 

Assuming the location of the virtual was contained in the element you found, then you have two pieces of verification: the coordinates for the virtual, and its description.

 

Of course there is flexibility in extenuating circumstances . . . the point is that cachers shouldn't claim a find without making an adequate effort. Other people utilizing an area that precludes access to a cache is not, in my opinion, an extenuating circumstance.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Markwell:

Another example of extreme circumstances making for bad precident:

 

... I had the log book in my hands ready to sign. The local authority came up and indicated that it was closing time. I had to either take the cache with me to sign it and return it later (something I didn't want to do) or replace the log book without signing it, which I did.


 

Yet you had ample warning the authority was coming to rehide the cache without being seen. That's good! I had a similar experience where the only alternate was to take the cache or compromise its location. I took the cache and notified the cache owner, and made two return trips before I was able to replace it unseen.

 

As luck would have it, it was one of those caches no one had managed to snag prior to my visit, and no one has logged an attempt on since . . .

 

quote:
Originally posted by Markwell:

 

This is a multistage cache with the second portion as a virtual. I'll count it as a "find" when I get to the final stage, so the point is kinda moot. However, I would venture that if I had signed the logbook, the cache would now be gone. And I was poised ready to sign the logbook pen inches from signing. A find? Or is there no variance in these rigid guidelines?


 

So you had time to jot down coordinates for the virtual? icon_wink.gif

 

Assuming the location of the virtual was contained in the element you found, then you have two pieces of verification: the coordinates for the virtual, and its description.

 

Of course there is flexibility in extenuating circumstances . . . the point is that cachers shouldn't claim a find without making an adequate effort. Other people utilizing an area that precludes access to a cache is not, in my opinion, an extenuating circumstance.

Link to comment

It's all part of the challenge. Usually I would say: No signing the logbook, no find. If you open the container and find no logbook, you improvise. Write a note and stick it in there. Leave a buck and jot down the serial number.

 

Getting to the geocache, opening it, and signing it without getting caught is part of the challenge. That's why I put mine right in the middle of busy streets. icon_wink.gif

 

There are exceptions to every rule, of course. (See below!) I think that the geocache owner should be the final judge.

 

- Seth!

 

[This message was edited by Seth! on April 18, 2002 at 07:29 PM.]

Link to comment

It's all part of the challenge. Usually I would say: No signing the logbook, no find. If you open the container and find no logbook, you improvise. Write a note and stick it in there. Leave a buck and jot down the serial number.

 

Getting to the geocache, opening it, and signing it without getting caught is part of the challenge. That's why I put mine right in the middle of busy streets. icon_wink.gif

 

There are exceptions to every rule, of course. (See below!) I think that the geocache owner should be the final judge.

 

- Seth!

 

[This message was edited by Seth! on April 18, 2002 at 07:29 PM.]

Link to comment

A few days ago my cache was plundered. The hunter was kind enough to report it on the cache page. He included a picture. http://www.visiondg.com/geocaching/kissena_1.jpg

 

Notice the tupperware cap on the middle left, the container on the middle right, his Legend on the tree trunk where the cache was original located. Log and all goodies were gone; only thing left was the pencil so he put it inside the container with the empty ziplocks and hid it under the tree.

(It was originally inside the tree but of course he didn't kmow that).

 

He didn't sign a log. There wasn't any.

 

He reported it as a find. Now get this.

It was his first cache!!

 

I admit I gave it some thought but my heart overruled and I sent him an email thanking him instead.

 

Sometimes rules can be silly.

 

Alan

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Alan2:

The link failed so here's his picture.


 

Sorry to see your Kissena Park cache was plundered, Alan, but this is what I feared would happen when I found it back on March 7 . . . there were youngsters playing just a foot or two from the exposed and readily accessible cache, and it was obvious that an older crowd gathered to drink and party a few yards away in the reeds.

 

With all that activity in the immediate vicinity of the cache, I think it had a pretty long life.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by BassoonPilot:

 

Sorry to see your Kissena Park cache was plundered, Alan, but this is what I feared would happen when I found it back on March 7 . . . there were youngsters playing just a foot or two from the exposed and readily accessible cache, and it was obvious that an older crowd gathered to drink and party a few yards away in the reeds.

 

With all that activity in the immediate vicinity of the cache, I think it had a pretty long life.


 

Yeah. Actually I was pretty amazed that it lasted that long too. Glad you got a chance to find it.

 

Funny thing though. I hunted a cache (Zulu3)in Central Park in midtown Manhattan during a really hot day during the winter. This particular cache has been there since October and found by dozens of very sneaky people. It's in a hollow of a standing tree. When I found it a large rock was located on top of it. So there I was with hundreds of people walking their dogs, jogging, just acting like typical New Yorkers in Central Park, and I'm standing on one leg for balance and leverage trying to lift the rock and then get the cache out of the tree. Eureka. Finally did it. Wrote in the log. Placed the cache back in the tree, threw the rock on top and then quickly left. Whew. Dozens of people had to see me and wonder what the heck I was doing. But then again a lot of strange people walk around NYC. SO I watched the log notices until the next person found it - intact. And a lot more people have found it since then. It's still there. Go figure?

 

Alan

Link to comment

If you think it's a find then post it. There are no rules for Geocaching. At least that's what I thought.

 

I found a cache last week. It was an ammo box frozen solid in the ground under three inches of snow. I couldn't get the box out of the ground. I chipped away at it with my walking pole but it wouldn't budge.

I logged it as a find. I'd travelled 3800 miles to get to that cache and spent two months working out the coordinates (GC1972), there was no way I was going to log it as "not found".

The cache owner was OK with this as he went a few days later and transferred the token I left into the box. I'm going back in August, so I'll go back there and sign the log.

Link to comment

I'd call it a find. Sounds to me like it was a bad placement on the owners part. I recently attempted a cache where the owner had placed a specific container over the cache to act as camouflage. I found the camouflage but not the cache itself. I logged it as a “not found” because I didn’t know that the camouflage was the camouflage until I corresponded with another cacher who’d found it, and then the owner who confirmed my suspicion. I changed my log to a “found” since, as far as I’m concerned, I located the correct coordinates and hiding place. The cache was stolen but only because it was not adequately hidden. That’s not my fault. The same is true in your case.

Link to comment

If you didn't sign it, it's not a find. For many caches, the challenge is getting it while people are around. That is exactly the case for my Quad Cache. I have had to wait 20+ minutes to get to it just because someone was sitting in front of it. You don't get to log it as a find just because you didn't feel like waiting.

 

rdw

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by DisQuoi:

 

I logged it as a “not found” because I didn’t know that the camouflage was the camouflage until I corresponded with another cacher who’d found it, and then the owner who confirmed my suspicion. I changed my log to a “found” since, as far as I’m concerned, I located the correct coordinates and hiding place.


 

It's up to you and the cache owner, of course, but in my mind that is a clear "Not Found." If the camouflage "tricked" you into believing that the cache was not there, and you left, then you did not find the cache.

 

24_700.gif

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by DisQuoi:

I'd call it a find. Sounds to me like it was a bad placement on the owners part.


 

I'd disagree. Different caches have different challenges. Sometimes it's hard to figure out what the real coordinates are (e.g. a puzzle), sometimes it's hard to get to the location (e.g. difficult terrain or a non-obvious approach). Sometimes the challenge is that the cache is in a public place and it's tough to get to it and sign the log without attracting attention. There's a cache hider here in Seattle who seems to specialize in hiding caches where you really feel exposed when searching/logging. I'm talking really exposed. Every time, I have to steel myself to the task of walking out into full view and finding the cache. Maybe it's easy for others, but it's tough for me. I love those caches, not despite the fact that they push my buttons but because they do. If this cache was in a busy place, I wouldn't call that a defect, I'd call it a challenge.

 

If the cache was suspended 100ft up in the air from a tree, would you count *seeing* it as logging a find, or would you say that getting the logbook and signing it was part of the challenge? How is the public location of this cache different?

 

Remember how magicians perform their tricks? Misdirection. While they're doing something they don't want you to see over *here*, they contrive to get you to look over *there* so you won't see it. Take a friend, have them make a big distraction. Give them an airhorn, or something. Have them juggle and give away balloon animals to the kids. Get creative.

 

I'd call it no find. For myself, I have a simple rule - sign the logbook, it's a find. No sign the logbook, no find. I like the rule because it's concrete - there are no vague interpretations. And if the cache is plundered and there's no logbook - that's a no find. Disappointing, yes. But not a find.

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by Alan2:

standing tree. When I found it a large rock was located on top of it. So there I was with hundreds of people walking their dogs, jogging, just acting like typical New Yorkers in Central Park, and I'm standing on one leg for balance and


 

Exactly... it's a feature of Central Park that no one will care what you're doing. I've retrieved a cache up on the rocks in the middle of the day in full view of everyone going by. It wasn't plundered until a number of finds later.

 

I noticed that if you point a camera at the tourists, they stop staring.

Link to comment

I had to return to a cache location because there was a homeless person sleeping just a few feet from the cache. I feel the same way about plundered caches. I've been to 3 or 4 locations, some that were a real pain to get to, only to find that the cache was gone or just parts of it remain. I think unless you retrieve the cache and sign the log, its a no find, no matter what the circumstances. But those are just the rules I play by. Everyone gets to make up their own. icon_biggrin.gif

 

"I thought you said this was a quick find!" - My wife

Link to comment

I had to return to a cache location because there was a homeless person sleeping just a few feet from the cache. I feel the same way about plundered caches. I've been to 3 or 4 locations, some that were a real pain to get to, only to find that the cache was gone or just parts of it remain. I think unless you retrieve the cache and sign the log, its a no find, no matter what the circumstances. But those are just the rules I play by. Everyone gets to make up their own. icon_biggrin.gif

 

"I thought you said this was a quick find!" - My wife

Link to comment

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...