Replacing containers

[+J&J Team Yukon]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

[+on4bam]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

 

Search the forum for "throwdown" and you'll have plenty of reading material.

 

I'd say, don't. Not your cache and if CO no longer caches (and thus can't perform maintenance) it's a NA.

[+narcissa]

Use the "Needs Archived" log to alert a reviewer to the problem. If you want to own a cache in that spot, you can place a new one when the old one is archived.

[Pup Patrol]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

 

1.) Post a "Needs Archived" log.

 

Help Center → Finding a Geocache → Finding a Geocache

3.8. I found a geocache that needs to be archived

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=434

 

2.) If the container and log are not there, what did you "find"? A set of coordinates where a cache used to be.

 

3.) Throwdowns...not exactly a legitimate way to "find" a cache, eh? Even Groundspeak disapproves.

 

Help Center → Hiding a Geocache → Geocache ownership: A long-term relationship

4.12. Respond to throwdowns

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=427

 

4.) If you're not interested in owning your own cache in that location, the throwdown is merely to add to your stats. If that's the way you want to play the game, that's up to you.

 

But throwing another container out there, with no intent to maintain it is not very honourable, in my opinion.

 

You're a very experienced cacher. I'm a little baffled as to why you feel the need to even think about this, let alone post on the forum about it. I'm feeling that you are looking for validation.

 

B.

[+J Grouchy]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

 

Would you log a find on a cache you own? I mean, if you're going to put a container there, then it's essentially your cache.

 

And if you are going there, why not just spare the expense and log a find without leaving a container?

 

Heck...just log a find from home and skip the trip out there.

 

All that just to say that no, you should not do someone else's job. You aren't "helping" them at all. You are only helping yourself.

[+TriciaG]

Don't do it. Ditto what everyone else has said.

 

If a cache is old, but the CO is not taking care of it, it should be archived regardless of its age. It's the normal life cycle of caches.

[+Touchstone]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

Rhetorical question back at ya: If the situation you describe doesn't warrant a Needs Maintenance/Needs Archived log, what does?

[+J Grouchy]

Here's a good example: https://coord.info/GC19XAQ

 

The CO left the game. Someone tried to "help" by replacing it after it went missing on several occasions. Eventually THEY moved away too. People kept logging DNFs for some reason, putting off the inevitable death. I posted an NA log and now it's been disabled and will almost certainly be archived in a month or so. If you leave a throwdown, is it your plan to keep maintaining it and replacing it when it goes missing? You wouldn't be able to maintain the cache page (clear out NM logs, post Owner Maintenance logs, update coordinates or descriptions or hints, etc.)...so no amount of throwdowns will really fix the real problem.

[+L0ne.R]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

 

Would you log a find on a cache you own? I mean, if you're going to put a container there, then it's essentially your cache.

 

And if you are going there, why not just spare the expense and log a find without leaving a container?

 

Heck...just log a find from home and skip the trip out there.

 

All that just to say that no, you should not do someone else's job. You aren't "helping" them at all. You are only helping yourself.

 

I agree. It's better to log the find then leave litter. But it's still poor form either way.

[+J Grouchy]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

 

Would you log a find on a cache you own? I mean, if you're going to put a container there, then it's essentially your cache.

 

And if you are going there, why not just spare the expense and log a find without leaving a container?

 

Heck...just log a find from home and skip the trip out there.

 

All that just to say that no, you should not do someone else's job. You aren't "helping" them at all. You are only helping yourself.

 

I agree. It's better to log the find then leave litter. But it's still poor form either way.

 

I was really just saying that to prove a point, not to encourage armchair logging. Logging a find on your own throwdown is basically logging a find on your own cache and about as ridiculous as logging a find on a cache you never found or even visited. It wasn't meant as a real suggestion.

[+L0ne.R]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

 

Would you log a find on a cache you own? I mean, if you're going to put a container there, then it's essentially your cache.

 

And if you are going there, why not just spare the expense and log a find without leaving a container?

 

Heck...just log a find from home and skip the trip out there.

 

All that just to say that no, you should not do someone else's job. You aren't "helping" them at all. You are only helping yourself.

 

I agree. It's better to log the find then leave litter. But it's still poor form either way.

 

I was really just saying that to prove a point, not to encourage armchair logging. Logging a find on your own throwdown is basically logging a find on your own cache and about as ridiculous as logging a find on a cache you never found or even visited. It wasn't meant as a real suggestion.

 

Agreed.

[+candlestick]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

I had one experience where there was an old cache that hadn't been found in three years and the container was no longer there. I spoke with the owner who wanted to keep it alive but couldn't put a replacement out at the time and was OK with me putting a throw down and claiming the find. That is the only case that I would feel is worth it to put a replacement but it sounds like the series you are referring to is at its end now. If there's something unique about that series maybe you could set out some new ones with the same theme in reference to the old cache?

 

On a different note it does get disappointing when you get all the way out to a cache only to find you can't log a find on it and there's no one to replace it 😅 I think that's why many people do the throw downs in the first place even though it's really not acceptable to do that.

[Pup Patrol]

I had one experience where there was an old cache that hadn't been found in three years and the container was no longer there. I spoke with the owner who wanted to keep it alive but couldn't put a replacement out at the time and was OK with me putting a throw down and claiming the find. That is the only case that I would feel is worth it to put a replacement but it sounds like the series you are referring to is at its end now.

 

That's not a "throwdown". That's more like lazy cache owner "maintenance", but it's not a "throwdown" when you have the cache owner's permission to replace the container.

 

I was just thinking...if the cache in the OP has had a long run of DNF's, then the "owner maintenance email" protocol from GS should have kicked in. GS sends the "owner maintenance" email to the CO, CO doesn't respond on the cache page, more dnf's, cache should have been at least disabled by the Reviewer. After a prescribed time, then the Reviewer would have archived it.

 

4.10. Maintenance emails from Geocaching HQ

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=713

 

Geocaching HQ sends emails to geocache owners when it appears that a geocache needs maintenance. The emails may result from any combination of logs, including Did Not Find (DNF's), Needs Maintenance (NM), Needs Archived (NA) or caches that have not been found in a long time.

 

B.

[+Manville Possum]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

 

Are we talking about pill bottles/film pots or ammo cans? I really think it's lame to claim a find on your own Throwdown, and it's part of the problem of holding up an area for new cache placements by active members.

 

Most Throwdowns are just geolitter.

[SunCatRune]

New to the community, so forgive my inexperience but I found a box yesterday that needed replacing. The owner seems to be MIA as far as I can tell. What are the thoughts on replacing a broken box? Like, the cache is still there, and people still find it from time to time, but the container is broken open and wet.... I would even consider adopting the cache, but it seems that isn't possible unless you can get in contact with the CO?

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I had one experience where there was an old cache that hadn't been found in three years and the container was no longer there. I spoke with the owner who wanted to keep it alive but couldn't put a replacement out at the time and was OK with me putting a throw down and claiming the find. That is the only case that I would feel is worth it to put a replacement but it sounds like the series you are referring to is at its end now.

 

That's not a "throwdown". That's more like lazy cache owner "maintenance", but it's not a "throwdown" when you have the cache owner's permission to replace the container.

 

 

I'm not so sure that there's an agreed upon definition of a throwdown, but if the owner gives prior permission to replace the container I think most would agree that it wouldn't be considered a throwdown.

 

However, someone might replace a cache knowing that the owner couldn't get to the location to replace it themselves (for an especially remote cache that could be a very common occurrence) and the CO could subsequently approve the replacement (and thank the geocachers for helping out). That doesn't necessarily mean that the CO is lazy. It's could just be that the "finder" was able to get to the location before the CO.

 

Replacing a container doesn't necessarily lead to "the problem of holding up an area for new cache placements by active members." There are certainly many places in the world that aren't so saturated that active members can't find a spot for new cache placements. I replaced a container a couple of years ago on a remote section of the wall in China. It's only been visited twice since. Oh, and I didn't log it as a Find.

Edited February 1, 2017 by NYPaddleCacher

[+Manville Possum]

Replacing a container doesn't necessarily lead to "the problem of holding up an area for new cache placements by active members." There are certainly many places in the world that aren't so saturated that active members can't find a spot for new cache placements. I replaced a container a couple of years ago on a remote section of the wall in China. It's only been visited twice since. Oh, and I didn't log it as a Find.

 

I think most of us have found a cache that is ownerless and propped up by the community, and yes it does prevent an active member from placing and maintaining a geocache at that location.

 

I would love to see Groundspeak do a sweep and clean up the ownerless listings, but that won't happen. Active members can just suck it up and leave better TD's and not pill bottles and film pots. I found a what I call a "Happy Panda" cache a few months ago, it was a smelly shrimp sauce container with a receipt from the restaurant under a lamp skirt. Now is that really helping? Anyway, I left an Altoids tin with a geocaching label on it with a proper geocaching log.

[Blue Square Thing]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

If it hasn't been found in years then don't do it.

 

If the container is there but clearly in need of replacement and you're willing to watch the cache page and so on, then it's not always a dreadful idea to replace the container after you've tried to make contact with the owner. But if the container can't be found by anyone then archive it.

[+narcissa]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

If it hasn't been found in years then don't do it.

 

If the container is there but clearly in need of replacement and you're willing to watch the cache page and so on, then it's not always a dreadful idea to replace the container after you've tried to make contact with the owner. But if the container can't be found by anyone then archive it.

 

This only works until someone logs a NM. Once it has the wrench, only the real cache owner can fix it.

[+J Grouchy]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

I had one experience where there was an old cache that hadn't been found in three years and the container was no longer there. I spoke with the owner who wanted to keep it alive but couldn't put a replacement out at the time and was OK with me putting a throw down and claiming the find. That is the only case that I would feel is worth it to put a replacement but it sounds like the series you are referring to is at its end now. If there's something unique about that series maybe you could set out some new ones with the same theme in reference to the old cache?

 

Once again, though, you would be claiming a find on your own cache at that point. The only time I've ever replaced a container and claimed a find was when I FOUND the original container but it was irreparably damaged, and only then with the CO's permission. At least in those instances, it was a clear case of FINDING the cache the CO put out and not "finding" a container I brought with me and put out for others. What it boils down to is I would never consider claiming a find on a container I did not actually FIND.

[+narcissa]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

I had one experience where there was an old cache that hadn't been found in three years and the container was no longer there. I spoke with the owner who wanted to keep it alive but couldn't put a replacement out at the time and was OK with me putting a throw down and claiming the find. That is the only case that I would feel is worth it to put a replacement but it sounds like the series you are referring to is at its end now. If there's something unique about that series maybe you could set out some new ones with the same theme in reference to the old cache?

 

On a different note it does get disappointing when you get all the way out to a cache only to find you can't log a find on it and there's no one to replace it I think that's why many people do the throw downs in the first place even though it's really not acceptable to do that.

 

Cachers working together is okay. Some of the hardliners will make disparaging comments about this, but realistically we all go through times when life gets in the way of geocaching and it's okay to lean on each other. This is a game that relies on cooperation, and sometimes that means asking a friend for help, or offering help to a friend. No reasonable cache owner or fellow cacher is going to look down on you for claiming a find when you helped with maintenance in an agreed-upon fashion.

 

If the cache owner is absent from the game, it's an entirely different matter.

Edited February 1, 2017 by narcissa

[+AussieMickeyD]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

 

Hi all,

I was introduced to Geocaching by a visiting Danish friend around 6 weeks ago and have been hooked on it ever since.

I've logged 118 finds in that time and have seen a big variety of innercity and bushland caches.

It's my first time in a Geocaching forum. My dilemma is linked to to this topic.

I have found around 10-12 caches by a particular CO who obviously placed a Lage number of caches in and around the City of Sydney.

His cache container of choice is a steel mint tin with a magnet taped to it so as to be able to stick it to metal structure.

The CO placed these caches from 2011-2012 they are mostly all still going, however, most are filled with logs that date back to their origin, so the paper has deteriorated and new slips of paper have been added by other cachers. The caches to the most part at in protected areas and are faring well, there are some, howerver, that have lids missing but are all still in play.

I have tried contacting the CO in regards to maintenance on one of the first of his caches I found but have heard nothing back.

So the question is do I maintain the cache and replace the ones that need it so as to keep the cache alive?

If so what should be done with old and remnants of old logs?

[+niraD]

The caches to the most part at in protected areas and are faring well, there are some, howerver, that have lids missing but are all still in play.

I have tried contacting the CO in regards to maintenance on one of the first of his caches I found but have heard nothing back.

So the question is do I maintain the cache and replace the ones that need it so as to keep the cache alive?

If the lid is missing, or the container is broken, or there is something else that needs to be fixed, then it's time for a Needs Maintenance log.

 

If several Needs Maintenance logs have already been posted with no response from the owner, then it's time for a Needs Archived log.

 

For reference, see the Help Center article:

What log type should I use?

[+AussieMickeyD]

The caches to the most part at in protected areas and are faring well, there are some, howerver, that have lids missing but are all still in play.

I have tried contacting the CO in regards to maintenance on one of the first of his caches I found but have heard nothing back.

So the question is do I maintain the cache and replace the ones that need it so as to keep the cache alive?

If the lid is missing, or the container is broken, or there is something else that needs to be fixed, then it's time for a Needs Maintenance log.

 

If several Needs Maintenance logs have already been posted with no response from the owner, then it's time for a Needs Archived log.

 

For reference, see the Help Center article:

What log type should I use?

 

Okay thank you

Could I ask what probably sounds like a dumb question, but where do I find the Needs Maintenance log options when posting on activity log

[+niraD]

On the web site, go to the cache page. Then click the "Log geocache" link in the top right corner (below the GC code). Then select Needs Maintenance for the Type of Log pulldown:

 

[+The A-Team]

Could I ask what probably sounds like a dumb question, but where do I find the Needs Maintenance log options when posting on activity log

Your use of the term "activity log" implies that you're using one of the official Geocaching® apps (that's the only place I've seen this term used). Unfortunately, you can't submit a Needs Maintenance or Needs Archive log through these apps (this may be possible in the future, but the future plan for these apps is unclear). You'll need to submit one of these logs through the website as per niraD's post.

[+AussieMickeyD]

Could I ask what probably sounds like a dumb question, but where do I find the Needs Maintenance log options when posting on activity log

Your use of the term "activity log" implies that you're using one of the official Geocaching® apps (that's the only place I've seen this term used). Unfortunately, you can't submit a Needs Maintenance or Needs Archive log through these apps (this may be possible in the future, but the future plan for these apps is unclear). You'll need to submit one of these logs through the website as per niraD's post.

 

Thank you both for your replies.

Yes, I am Beginn to discover the limitations of the offical app Vs the Online site.

I did look into the logging via website and found the much larger pull down menu

The app only gives Did Not Find, Found it and Write note options.

Editing logs also cannot be done via app.

The app is obviously very convenient for Geocaching on the go but is a very stripped down version of what's available online.

As stated I am a mere novice at this and learning everyday.

I am now digressing from the original subject matter in this forum and I thank you all for your input.

[+L0ne.R]

Could I ask what probably sounds like a dumb question, but where do I find the Needs Maintenance log options when posting on activity log

Your use of the term "activity log" implies that you're using one of the official Geocaching® apps (that's the only place I've seen this term used). Unfortunately, you can't submit a Needs Maintenance or Needs Archive log through these apps (this may be possible in the future, but the future plan for these apps is unclear). You'll need to submit one of these logs through the website as per niraD's post.

 

Thank you both for your replies.

Yes, I am Beginn to discover the limitations of the offical app Vs the Online site.

I did look into the logging via website and found the much larger pull down menu

The app only gives Did Not Find, Found it and Write note options.

Editing logs also cannot be done via app.

The app is obviously very convenient for Geocaching on the go but is a very stripped down version of what's available online.

As stated I am a mere novice at this and learning everyday.

I am now digressing from the original subject matter in this forum and I thank you all for your input.

 

That's really too bad about the GC app. Other apps, such as my favorite Cachly, provide the full set of log types.

[+AussieMickeyD]

Could I ask what probably sounds like a dumb question, but where do I find the Needs Maintenance log options when posting on activity log

Your use of the term "activity log" implies that you're using one of the official Geocaching® apps (that's the only place I've seen this term used). Unfortunately, you can't submit a Needs Maintenance or Needs Archive log through these apps (this may be possible in the future, but the future plan for these apps is unclear). You'll need to submit one of these logs through the website as per niraD's post.

 

Thank you both for your replies.

Yes, I am Beginn to discover the limitations of the offical app Vs the Online site.

I did look into the logging via website and found the much larger pull down menu

The app only gives Did Not Find, Found it and Write note options.

Editing logs also cannot be done via app.

The app is obviously very convenient for Geocaching on the go but is a very stripped down version of what's available online.

As stated I am a mere novice at this and learning everyday.

I am now digressing from the original subject matter in this forum and I thank you all for your input.

 

That's really too bad about the GC app. Other apps, such as my favorite Cachly, provide the full set of log types.

 

I might need to check that app out

. Thank you LOne.R

Could I pose one more question if I may.

My son, who is 19, is also a Geocacher. He found a cache in recent weeks and logged the find.

He told me yesterday that the cache location has disappeared from the cache maps. I'm assuming it has been archived, however, his find count went down by 1 as it seems this cache find was stricken from his found caches list.

This seems wrong to delete a find of someone's logs just because the cache has now been archived.

Could I get your feedback on this. And is this the norm?

[Pup Patrol]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

 

Hi all,

I was introduced to Geocaching by a visiting Danish friend around 6 weeks ago and have been hooked on it ever since.

I've logged 118 finds in that time and have seen a big variety of innercity and bushland caches.

It's my first time in a Geocaching forum. My dilemma is linked to to this topic.

I have found around 10-12 caches by a particular CO who obviously placed a Lage number of caches in and around the City of Sydney.

His cache container of choice is a steel mint tin with a magnet taped to it so as to be able to stick it to metal structure.

The CO placed these caches from 2011-2012 they are mostly all still going, however, most are filled with logs that date back to their origin, so the paper has deteriorated and new slips of paper have been added by other cachers. The caches to the most part at in protected areas and are faring well, there are some, howerver, that have lids missing but are all still in play.

I have tried contacting the CO in regards to maintenance on one of the first of his caches I found but have heard nothing back.

So the question is do I maintain the cache and replace the ones that need it so as to keep the cache alive?

If so what should be done with old and remnants of old logs?

 

The thing folks don't often realize in keeping crappy, ownerless caches going is that no one other than the CO can maintain the cache listing.

 

Once someone posts a "needs maintenance" log, that is putting something in play that "helpful" cachers can do nothing about.

 

Post the appropriate "needs maintenance" logs, and move on. If the cache is eventually archived, you can think about putting your own cache there. Then you will be the one who has control over the listing, and be the one accepting responsibility for maintaining the cache and the listing.

 

Help Center - Finding a Geocache

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.book&id=25

 

4. Logging a Geocache

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=107

 

4.2. What log type should I use?

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=534

 

3.7. I found a geocache that needs maintenance

http://support.Groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=551

 

B.

[+niraD]

My son, who is 19, is also a Geocacher. He found a cache in recent weeks and logged the find.

He told me yesterday that the cache location has disappeared from the cache maps. I'm assuming it has been archived, however, his find count went down by 1 as it seems this cache find was stricken from his found caches list.

This seems wrong to delete a find of someone's logs just because the cache has now been archived.

Could I get your feedback on this. And is this the norm?

To me, it sounds like something else is going on.

 

When caches are archived, they no longer appear on maps, but the past logs remain and no one's find count is affected.

 

Caches are "retracted" in rare circumstances. Retracted caches no longer appear on maps, but they will appear as though they had never been published in the first place. Archived caches look like they were published and then archived, which is different. But still, no one's find count should be affected.

 

Logs are sometimes deleted, but if a log is deleted, then the email address associated with the geocaching.com account should receive an email notification.

[Pup Patrol]

Could I ask what probably sounds like a dumb question, but where do I find the Needs Maintenance log options when posting on activity log

Your use of the term "activity log" implies that you're using one of the official Geocaching® apps (that's the only place I've seen this term used). Unfortunately, you can't submit a Needs Maintenance or Needs Archive log through these apps (this may be possible in the future, but the future plan for these apps is unclear). You'll need to submit one of these logs through the website as per niraD's post.

 

Thank you both for your replies.

Yes, I am Beginn to discover the limitations of the offical app Vs the Online site.

I did look into the logging via website and found the much larger pull down menu

The app only gives Did Not Find, Found it and Write note options.

Editing logs also cannot be done via app.

The app is obviously very convenient for Geocaching on the go but is a very stripped down version of what's available online.

As stated I am a mere novice at this and learning everyday.

I am now digressing from the original subject matter in this forum and I thank you all for your input.

 

That's really too bad about the GC app. Other apps, such as my favorite Cachly, provide the full set of log types.

 

I might need to check that app out

. Thank you LOne.R

Could I pose one more question if I may.

My son, who is 19, is also a Geocacher. He found a cache in recent weeks and logged the find.

He told me yesterday that the cache location has disappeared from the cache maps. I'm assuming it has been archived, however, his find count went down by 1 as it seems this cache find was stricken from his found caches list.

This seems wrong to delete a find of someone's logs just because the cache has now been archived.

Could I get your feedback on this. And is this the norm?

 

1.) Posting a "needs maintenance" log does not increase your find count. It is a separate log action than "found it". Once could conceivably find the cache, and it needs maintenance. That requires 2 separate logging actions.

 

Don't be afraid to post NM logs. They are vital to the community and to the Reviewer.

 

2.) Caches that have been logged as found do not get removed from your stats if they are archived.

 

The only reason a find count goes down is because a "found it" log is deleted. This can happen when duplicate "found it" logs are posted and the extraneous ones are deleted. Or if the CO finds that the "found it" log is false, ie the log book is not signed.

 

You can see all of your logs by going to your profile:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/profile/?id=19161726

 

Caches logged as found that have been subsequently archived will still be there, but with a line through the cache name.

 

B.

[Pup Patrol]

Could I ask what probably sounds like a dumb question, but where do I find the Needs Maintenance log options when posting on activity log

Your use of the term "activity log" implies that you're using one of the official Geocaching® apps (that's the only place I've seen this term used). Unfortunately, you can't submit a Needs Maintenance or Needs Archive log through these apps (this may be possible in the future, but the future plan for these apps is unclear). You'll need to submit one of these logs through the website as per niraD's post.

 

That's ridiculous.

 

No wonder so many folks don't log the appropriate NM's. They don't even know about them!

 

B.

[+AussieMickeyD]

Once again, thank you all for your response to this I will pass the information onto my son.

 

He did say once the cache disappeared from the map he went back to see if it was still there but it had been removed.

Most interesting.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Replacing a container doesn't necessarily lead to "the problem of holding up an area for new cache placements by active members." There are certainly many places in the world that aren't so saturated that active members can't find a spot for new cache placements. I replaced a container a couple of years ago on a remote section of the wall in China. It's only been visited twice since. Oh, and I didn't log it as a Find.

 

I think most of us have found a cache that is ownerless and propped up by the community, and yes it does prevent an active member from placing and maintaining a geocache at that location.

 

My point is that while a published and active cache prevents another member from placing a cache in that same, exact location, it's not an issue if the cache is in a cache sparse area. In this particular case, the cache was not ownerless, but the owner (as well as COs of other caches in the general area) lives in Beijing, well over an hour away. There was only one other caches placed in general area. It's probably a 2-3 hour hike away. It's not like anyone is waiting for the spot to open up so that a new cache cache can be placed there. Freeing up a spot for a new cache doesn't benefit anyone if nobody places a new cache in the spot.

 

[Blue Square Thing]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

If it hasn't been found in years then don't do it.

 

If the container is there but clearly in need of replacement and you're willing to watch the cache page and so on, then it's not always a dreadful idea to replace the container after you've tried to make contact with the owner. But if the container can't be found by anyone then archive it.

 

This only works until someone logs a NM. Once it has the wrench, only the real cache owner can fix it.

Yes, but loads and loads of caches have wrenches on that the owner never fixes anyway.

[+narcissa]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

If it hasn't been found in years then don't do it.

 

If the container is there but clearly in need of replacement and you're willing to watch the cache page and so on, then it's not always a dreadful idea to replace the container after you've tried to make contact with the owner. But if the container can't be found by anyone then archive it.

 

This only works until someone logs a NM. Once it has the wrench, only the real cache owner can fix it.

Yes, but loads and loads of caches have wrenches on that the owner never fixes anyway.

 

Oh, around here you'll eventually get nagged by a reviewer if you don't clear the wrench.

[+L0ne.R]

What is your thoughts on when replacing a cachethat hasn't been found in years and CO nor longer caches. Is it ok to log a find when you do? Not trying to be petty but my time to fixing a replacement and putting it back out for a series to continue. Thoughts please, I have heard both.

If it hasn't been found in years then don't do it.

 

If the container is there but clearly in need of replacement and you're willing to watch the cache page and so on, then it's not always a dreadful idea to replace the container after you've tried to make contact with the owner. But if the container can't be found by anyone then archive it.

 

This only works until someone logs a NM. Once it has the wrench, only the real cache owner can fix it.

Yes, but loads and loads of caches have wrenches on that the owner never fixes anyway.

 

In your scenario if the container is in need of replacement and already has a red wrench, propping it up isn't doing any good. What would be better, since you are already willing to maintain the container you leave behind, is posting the NA (perhaps preface the NA log by saying that the container is broken and needs replacing not necessarily archiving), then when the cache is archived (likely, given the scenario), go back and place your container and submit it for approval. Now the cache has a bona fide responsible owner who will take care of the container and listing and one who will post OMs after maintenance checks. You will set a good example for the community.

[+Harry Dolphin]

My son, who is 19, is also a Geocacher. He found a cache in recent weeks and logged the find.

He told me yesterday that the cache location has disappeared from the cache maps. I'm assuming it has been archived, however, his find count went down by 1 as it seems this cache find was stricken from his found caches list.

This seems wrong to delete a find of someone's logs just because the cache has now been archived.

Could I get your feedback on this. And is this the norm?

To me, it sounds like something else is going on.

 

When caches are archived, they no longer appear on maps, but the past logs remain and no one's find count is affected.

 

Caches are "retracted" in rare circumstances. Retracted caches no longer appear on maps, but they will appear as though they had never been published in the first place. Archived caches look like they were published and then archived, which is different. But still, no one's find count should be affected.

 

Logs are sometimes deleted, but if a log is deleted, then the email address associated with the geocaching.com account should receive an email notification.

 

Many years ago, I logged two caches that were retracted (not sure that happens much these days.) One was in a site deemed to be historic, and the cache inappropriate. If I remember correctly, my log was deleted, and I questioned GS, and the log was restored. Click on the cache page from the find, and there is no cache page. But my find was restored! The other was a multi with the final too close to a traditional. (That was before multis had to have the final coords listed. I doubt that happens much any more.) That log was not deleted. Just the cache page was...

[+J&J Team Yukon]

Seems most are of the opinion to not log a find if you put a replacement container out. We replaced with the exact same container and same location on the same type host. Feeling guilty for doing the two we did and the only reason was to keep a fun series going for other cachers to enjoy at a lake. Slap my hand, sure won't do it again.

Thanks for the imput.

[+J&J Team Yukon]

Seems most are of the opinion to not log a find if you put a replacement container out. We replaced with the exact same container and same location on the same type host. Feeling guilty for doing the two we did and the only reason was to keep a fun series going for other cachers to enjoy at a lake.

Thanks for the imput.

[+Manville Possum]

We replaced with the exact same container and same location on the same type host.

 

Are we talking about a film canister under a lamp skirt, or what exactly?

[+J&J Team Yukon]

Bison tube

[+narcissa]

Seems most are of the opinion to not log a find if you put a replacement container out. We replaced with the exact same container and same location on the same type host. Feeling guilty for doing the two we did and the only reason was to keep a fun series going for other cachers to enjoy at a lake.

Thanks for the imput.

 

Most are of the opinion that you should not replace someone else's cache. Whether or not you log a find is really beside the point.

[+Manville Possum]

Bison tube

 

Well, I'm a firm believer in leaving better TD's. I have several small "custom" geocache containers, mostly painted Altoids containers with an official geocaching label and log sheet. My plans for them are to repair a few soggy paper lazy cache owner listings with.

 

I also have plans to upgrade an old ownerless listing with a nice ammo can. A few years ago I would have never considered this, but geocaching has changed. It's mostly crap containers placed for the numbers, and if I can prop up a few old grandfathered listings with real geocaches, I don't see any harm. Still, I would not log that I found something that I placed because I could not find the actual container.

[+L0ne.R]

1486090906[/url]' post='5634097']

Seems most are of the opinion to not log a find if you put a replacement container out. We replaced with the exact same container and same location on the same type host. Feeling guilty for doing the two we did and the only reason was to keep a fun series going for other cachers to enjoy at a lake.

Thanks for the imput.

 

I think we have to ask ourselves what the greatest motivation is to leave the throwdown. Would we leave it if we could not claim the find? Would we remove our find to prove that the intent was only to leave something for others to enjoy? Would we place a bison tube if more finders would enjoy something better and more watertight, example a coghlan's matchstick container, a preform, a palm size authentic Lock&Lock?

[cezanne]

I think we have to ask ourselves what the greatest motivation is to leave the throwdown. Would we leave it if we could not claim the find? Would we remove our find to prove that the intent was only to leave something for others to enjoy? Would we place a bison tube if more finders would enjoy something better and more watertight, example a coghlan's matchstick container, a preform, a palm size authentic Lock&Lock?

 

While it is certainly true that some cachers leave throwdowns only to be able to claim a find, I do not think that it makes sense to draw such a strict line between different sources of motivations.

 

For many cachers out there it is important to be able to claim a find for a cache. They would not hide a cache together with someone else if they could not log their find as "beta test" with their own account.

 

They also would not like helping out a friend with maintenance (upon mutual agreement, not as a throwdown where just the cacher who leaves something thinks he helps the cache owner)

if they could not claim a find it for the concerned cache (this then would mean they never ever could claim a find for that cache while for a cache one ends up with a DNF one gets a further chance).

[+L0ne.R]

I think we have to ask ourselves what the greatest motivation is to leave the throwdown. Would we leave it if we could not claim the find? Would we remove our find to prove that the intent was only to leave something for others to enjoy? Would we place a bison tube if more finders would enjoy something better and more watertight, example a coghlan's matchstick container, a preform, a palm size authentic Lock&Lock™?

 

While it is certainly true that some cachers leave throwdowns only to be able to claim a find, I do not think that it makes sense to draw such a strict line between different sources of motivations.

 

For many cachers out there it is important to be able to claim a find for a cache. They would not hide a cache together with someone else if they could not log their find as "beta test" with their own account.

 

They also would not like helping out a friend with maintenance (upon mutual agreement, not as a throwdown where just the cacher who leaves something thinks he helps the cache owner)

if they could not claim a find it for the concerned cache (this then would mean they never ever could claim a find for that cache while for a cache one ends up with a DNF one gets a further chance).

 

Right, the primary motivation in the examples you give is to claim a find.

Without the smiley reward they would not care to help beta test a cache, or help a friend with maintenance.

 

 

[cezanne]

Right, the primary motivation in the examples you give is to claim a find.

Without the smiley reward they would not care to help beta test a cache, or help a friend with maintenance.

 

No, not necessarily primary. I do not think that is ok to accuse others of something just because one's personal caching ethics are different.

 

Moreover, I was not talking about real beta testing, just about what is very common around here that people who participated in the hiding process log the cache as found cache (with clearly saying that they have been present).

It's not about getting a further "+1" - they just do not want to end up with a cache they neither own nor can find.

 

If I have the option to decide whether I rather want that two cachers hide a cache that I enjoy together (and one of them or both in case of a team account for hiding log a find) or that cache never gets hidden all, I clearly vote for the former. It does not hurt me if someone logs a find in such a case.

 

I also see no reason to punish someone who is willing to help out a cache owner in cases where help is really needed and for some cachers not being allowed to ever claim a find for a certain cache is a punishment which can never be compensated for again unlike the case of a DNF when one can return and potentially log a find later. While this is not something which is important for me, I do respect that other people have different preferences and I would not say that my approach is better or more ethical.

 

I understand that unsolicitated actions to leave a replacement container can cause a lot of issues - however the aspect what is the primary/secondary etc motivation for someone to do something is irrelevant in the cases I mentioned when it comes to effects to geocaching.

Edited February 3, 2017 by cezanne

[+raritan]

Use the "Needs Archived" log to alert a reviewer to the problem. If you want to own a cache in that spot, you can place a new one when the old one is archived.

 

Exactly!