Logooks Required For New Caches

2k · January 9, 2004

In reading the latest rules on planting caches I noticed the following: "A container with just an object or codeword for verification may NOT be approved if the cache does not also include a logbook." Some of the most challenging caches that I have searched for were to small to include a logbook. One of the caches that I placed did not include a logbook but required that only state quarters that had not been previously logged be allowed. This was a particularly popular cache. My question is why is a logbook required. It certainly is not to eliminate fraud since we all know that there are people logging finds online that have never been near a cache. I do not want to stir up trouble, I am just interested in everyones opinion including the moderators.

9.4k · January 9, 2004

Take something from the cache, leave something in the cache, write about it in the logbook just doesn't quite work without the logbook. I do agree that some containers are too small for a meaningful-sized logbook (or logsheet), the logbook requirement prevents people from gluing a dime on the back of a historical marker and getting it approved as a traditional micro-cache (email the date on the dime for verification) instead of a virtual.

2.1k · January 9, 2004

the logbook requirement prevents people from gluing a dime on the back of a historical marker and getting it approved as a traditional micro-cache (email the date on the dime for verification) instead of a virtual.

And even then, the cache owners are not even verifying them....

5.3k · January 9, 2004

There are pretty easy ways to comply with this rule without sacrificing the quality of the caches. One example would be to have a secondary cache if the primary container is too small to contain the logbook; the primary container contains the coordinates of the secondary container, which contains the logbook. A simple two-step multicache. I don't think there is a rule that says that stages of a multicache have to be further than .1 mile apart, but I must confess that I have a hard time keeping up with the current interpretations of all the cache-placing rules.

I think that most, if not all, of the new rules for cache placements are counterproductive, but we're stuck with them, so the best course of action is to be creative in placing caches that comply with the rules but still have novel and interesting elements.

Edited January 9, 2004 by fizzymagic

2.1k · January 9, 2004

I will further say that if it's a container and considered a traditional, then it should have a log book...If it's something without a log book, then it would be a virtual, just like the dime example SAXMAN stated. That really should be a virtual as there is no logbook to sign and you are using something on site to verify you actually being there.

Edit: For calling saxman samnan...

Edited January 9, 2004 by woodsters

9.4k · January 9, 2004

...just like the dime example samnan stated.

Who?

24.7k · January 9, 2004

I think logbooks are a good idea, but that they should not be a deal breaker on a cache being approved. Especially for a micro.

2k · January 9, 2004

You need to try to figure out how to put a logbook in one of those small altoids containers. I found a cache that contained a dime in one of those. There was no additional room for a logbook.

2.1k · January 9, 2004

You need to try to figure out how to put a logbook in one of those small altoids containers. I found a cache that contained a dime in one of those. There was no additional room for a logbook.

remove the dime and put a folded up piece of paper there....like I said, if it's something that can't hold a log and there is something that you have to verify with the owner to claim the find, then it should be a virtual...no difference in that, than telling someone what year so and so happened or that someone died...

January 9, 2004

I think the logbook is one of the defining elements of a physical cache, and should be absolutely required. Container + logbook + location = geocache. I am not too concerned about "verification", but notionally the logbook is the physical evidence of the hider to cache to finder linkage. I want creativity and freedom from restrictive rules, but still strongly believe that there should be some elemental consistency -and a logbook requirement is just that. To me, allowing a physical cache not to have a logbook, would be akin to a Haiku poetry club allowing 6 lines in a Haiku, or an Origami club allowing the use of staples!

Edited January 9, 2004 by seneca

1.2k · January 9, 2004

I like the physical logbook. It has a much more personal feel than the online snippets. I like the doodles, stamps and stickers from my fellow cachers.

6.5k · January 9, 2004

You need to try to figure out how to put a logbook in one of those small altoids containers.

Yup what Woodster said. Found one of these little puppies at a rest stop over Xmas. I've had a couple banging around in my center console just waiting to be hidden. They might make a nasty intermediate stage for a multi too.

January 9, 2004

You need to try to figure out how to put a logbook in one of those small altoids containers. I found a cache that contained a dime in one of those. There was no additional room for a logbook.

Actually it is not that difficult. I have a micro-micro in an Altoids breath strip container. There is no pencil, but the cache contains a very small folded piece of paper inside a very small plastic bag made from the corner of a sandwich bag and a small piece of tape. It worked just fine (for 4 weeks now). I tend to like the idea of having a log, since a cache is supposed to be a 'container' with stuff inside. As someone said earlier, take away this requirement and you could make an old penny a cache, and just require that the person email you the date. That would really be stretching the meaning of the word cache.

January 9, 2004

If it's something without a log book, then it would be a virtual...

Yep, exactly!

So, what is the difference between getting "code" from the environment and putting the code there?

There isn't one. Code word caches should be considered virts.

38.2k · January 9, 2004

I've seen and fit logbooks in some very small containers (including Bison cylinders and Listerine breath strip boxes), so exactly how small are you talking?

2.1k · January 9, 2004

nice a**....I mean avatar!

January 9, 2004

I've seen and fit logbooks in some very small containers (including Bison cylinders and Listerine breath strip boxes), so exactly how small are you talking?

was the logbook large enough for a full name or only initails??

1.7k · January 9, 2004

I have made log strips for a bison tube.

You have room for a full name.

And the reverse side has the stash note.

Not sure what a "logook" is, but it sounds distasteful.

7.4k · January 9, 2004

The main reason I recall for logbooks being required is that we were starting to get a horde of submitted caches that really blurred the line of what you would define as a cache: a pair of sneakers flung into the trees (name the brand to log a find), a sliced-open tennis ball with a random piece of garbage stuffed into it (identify the piece of garbage for your find), a tube of clear plastic sealed at both ends and containing chocolate sprinkles (claim a find by counting the number of sprinkles and emailing the number), etc., etc., etc.

These at best amount to artificial virtual caches and at worst amount to garbage thrown into the woods. In order to stop the spread of these submissions, a physical cache was defined as having a logbook, and thus a logbook became a requirement.

2.1k · January 9, 2004

a pair of sneakers flung into the trees (name the brand to log a find), a sliced-open tennis ball with a random piece of garbage stuffed into it (identify the piece of garbage for your find), a tube of clear plastic sealed at both ends and containing chocolate sprinkles (claim a find by counting the number of sprinkles and emailing the number), etc., etc., etc.

People should be banned for even thinking of submitting those...lol

2.5k · January 9, 2004

The main reason I recall for logbooks being required is that we were starting to get a horde of submitted caches that really blurred the line of what you would define as a cache: a pair of sneakers flung into the trees (name the brand to log a find), a sliced-open tennis ball with a random piece of garbage stuffed into it (identify the piece of garbage for your find), a tube of clear plastic sealed at both ends and containing chocolate sprinkles (claim a find by counting the number of sprinkles and emailing the number), etc., etc., etc.

I recall it differently, but then again, my memory is not a steel trap.

My recollection is that someone went hunting for a micro and couldn't find it.

Instead of accepting that they couldn't find a cache, they started complaining in the forums that there were too many micros.

And not only were there too many micros, these micros used code words instead of logbooks.

Soon afterwards logbooks became mandatory and code words were banned.

Like I said, that's how I remember it, I could be wrong.

7.4k · January 9, 2004

I don't remember anything like that occurring, cachew nut.

2.5k · January 9, 2004

Like I said, my memory isn't the greatest. But I went searching back in the forums and found what I think started it all. I sent you a link over PM since I really don't intend to embarass anybody, but you will see where it all started.

7.4k · January 9, 2004

Ah, it looks like my memory is failing! I forgot about that thread. That may have played a part, although I don't remember it coming up when the logbook rule was first discussed. It makes sense that it had some impact, though. Thanks for looking that up.

24.7k · January 9, 2004

In the days of old logbooks were a guideline but micro's didn't require them due to size. About a year later give or take a couple of months logs were required if at all possible in any size cache.

I missed out on the debate but not the shift.

January 9, 2004

I have been amazed and impressed by the creative ways people have come up with to put a log of some sort into their micros. I must say, this hobby seems to really bring out the ingenuity of many people.

I made the mistake of hiding one of my caches ( a spice bottle container ) and not putting in a log book; too small I thought. Boy, did I get shamed ! soon after, I started seeing all the REALLY small logs. Sheepishly, I placed a log book in my gigantic spice bottle.

3.1k · January 9, 2004

Even with an altoids tin you can squeeze in a bit of paper. So you can have tiny logs in just about any container.

Not long ago I did a cache where you were supposed to email the date of the coin inside since there was no log book. Someone had taken the coin. Figures.......

January 9, 2004

What if some joker replaces the coin with one of a different year?

1.6k · January 9, 2004

The WB's have several micros in Omaha that have a clever log book system for magnetic key holder sized micros. They get those address label size post it notes and put a pin through the end with the binding glue on it. This keeps the little posted hooked together even if the binding fails. The logs are small, but you can definitely log your find. Cool fix and it would fit in just about any micro.

Really don't need trade items, but you really do need a log book.

1.4k · January 10, 2004

I've seen and fit logbooks in some very small containers (including Bison cylinders and Listerine breath strip boxes), so exactly how small are you talking?

I got one that is a nitro pill bottle for 3 emergency pills to carry on your key chain. There is one item inside that is smaller then a rolled up piece of paper and it barely fits.

1.3k · January 10, 2004

One of the caches that I placed did not include a logbook but required that only state quarters that had not been previously logged be allowed.

If you had trimmed some small post-it notes to be the size of quarters and asked people to sign a post-it note and attach it to their quarter would it have really made a difference?

http://gothiccastle.safeshopper.com/78/1994.htm?104These could be probably made into very efficient micro logbooks.

I'm sitting here thinking about how to get creative with logbooks and it's leading to some interesting things. CarleenP wants to hide co-ordinates in a card catalog. Imagine if the cache for a multi was a normall unused meeting room with a whiteboard or a chalkboard and the logbook was really a disposable camera?

9.2k · January 10, 2004

Ah, it looks like my memory is failing! I forgot about that thread. That may have played a part, although I don't remember it coming up when the logbook rule was first discussed. It makes sense that it had some impact, though. Thanks for looking that up.

I remember both of those. While each had an impact, I think it was the "junk" micros that led to the manditory book rule.

January 10, 2004

You can still use the code word for a stage in a multi, the code is the coords for the next stage,

now a question:

How can you make a decint logbook for a altoids strip container, one that you don;t have t replace everyday because it only holds on log

1.3k · January 10, 2004

We've have a big increase in the number of micros recently, but that's ok. They have logs, I just wish people wouldn't put micros where a traditional cache could be hidden. I plan to use micros AKA Magnetic Key Keepers to give coordinates of a traditional cache. I have 4 micros that will include the coordinates to the traditional cache.

9.4k · January 10, 2004

Altoids strips containers can fit a decent size logbook- enough for 40 names. Take an 8 1/2 by 11 inch piece of paper and cut a 3/4 or 1 inch strip that is 11 inches long. Fold roughly every inch to give you several 'pages' and place it in your container. There's still room for a dime in the cache. :tongue:

1.3k · January 10, 2004

www.texasgeocaching.com has some great examples of micro logsheets. They have an excellent website. :tongue:

1.3k · January 10, 2004

How can you make a decint logbook for a altoids strip container, one that you don;t have t replace everyday because it only holds on log

Normal sheet of paper cut and folded. Legal would probably fit as well and if cut diagonally would give a nice long strip of paper. Experiment for best length.

To create tab for easy extract place a peice of tape across the to and fold the tape over (like most people do on packing tape so it doesn't get impossible to find out where the tape begins). I didn't really find it necessary so I didn't bother for purposes of this experiment.

If the log area used is about 1 fold per person, that's 28 logs after both sides are filled. If they use more space, it's not like it's hard to leave a few spare logbooks in your car and visit the micro for replacement more often.

Edit: apparently as I was cutting and taking photos other people said the same thing. Such is life.

Edited January 10, 2004 by bons

9.4k · January 10, 2004

That's the way I did mine, Bons.

2.1k · January 10, 2004

Use that noggin!

January 11, 2004

A micro which we found in England (Steps in the Wall) contained a logbook that consisted of a rolled strip of paper about 1/4 inch wide and about 4 foot long. It was quite the chore to unroll the used portion to sign the log. This is definitely a case to be FTF.

January 11, 2004

bons

that is exactly how one I found looked good job of posting a pic so others can see just how it is done.

BTW I like in rainey west wash near the coast and if placed properly it can stay dry the one I found was and I found it in the rain.

2.7k · January 11, 2004

The main reason I recall for logbooks being required is that we were starting to get a horde of submitted caches that really blurred the line of what you would define as a cache: a pair of sneakers flung into the trees (name the brand to log a find), a sliced-open tennis ball with a random piece of garbage stuffed into it (identify the piece of garbage for your find), a tube of clear plastic sealed at both ends and containing chocolate sprinkles (claim a find by counting the number of sprinkles and emailing the number), etc., etc., etc.

These at best amount to artificial virtual caches and at worst amount to garbage thrown into the woods. In order to stop the spread of these submissions, a physical cache was defined as having a logbook, and thus a logbook became a requirement.

Ok, so whats to stop someone from putting a piece of paper in the shoes, the random garbage in the tennis ball is a piece of paper, the sprinkles are replaced by shreds of paper?

Or the owner just SAYING there is a log book.

Some of what passes for log books is no more than a scrap of paper. Many of the micros that contain them (such as the altoids tins) are not in any way, shape, or form water resistant and the "log books" inside are almost always so wet they are useless (unless you have an urgent need for a spit-wad) []

The magnetic key containers were mentioned- they are great, but ONLY if placed in a weatherproof area. THEY GET SOAKED.

A WET LOG BOOK IS NO BETTER THAN NO LOG BOOK.

January 11, 2004

Some of what passes for log books is no more than a scrap of paper. Many of the micros that contain them (such as the altoids tins) are not in any way, shape, or form water resistant and the "log books" inside are almost always so wet they are useless (unless you have an urgent need for a spit-wad) []

This may be just a problem of poor placement for this type of micro. The one I found was dry despite the rain. I will wait till I find more of them to pass any judgement on this, I may be wrong.

38.2k · January 11, 2004

I forget whose cache this was....

3.5k · January 11, 2004

Or the owner just SAYING there is a log book.

I doubt that tactic would make you very popular with your local cachers and eventually the word would filter back to a cache reviewer.

2.7k · January 11, 2004

Dang! Log book got lost AGAIN!

February 7, 2004

the logbook requirement prevents people from gluing a dime on the back of a historical marker and getting it approved as a traditional micro-cache (email the date on the dime for verification) instead of a virtual.

And even then, the cache owners are not even verifying them....

A virtual cache is an existing, permanent landmark of a very unique and compelling nature. (Quoted from the rules)

Since your "Dime" was not existing it doesn't quallify as a Virtual either.

February 7, 2004

I forget whose cache this was....

was? what are you doing with it?

9.4k · February 7, 2004

the logbook requirement prevents people from gluing a dime on the back of a historical marker and getting it approved as a traditional micro-cache (email the date on the dime for verification) instead of a virtual.

And even then, the cache owners are not even verifying them....

A virtual cache is an existing, permanent landmark of a very unique and compelling nature. (Quoted from the rules)

Since your "Dime" was not existing it doesn't quallify as a Virtual either.

That's right. With the dime, it becomes a code-word traditional, even though it really is a virtual. That's why there are logbooks, to prevent this from happening.

Logooks Required For New Caches

Recommended Posts

Join the conversation