Jump to content

2014 - Oldest unfound caches


JPreto

Recommended Posts

Hi all!!!

 

Looking at a related topic went and searched, with the great Project-GC tools, for the oldest caches still to find in all the world. This is the result ordered by GC code, placed before the end of 2004:

 

http://coord.info/GC105E 10-07-2001 Conch Shell Horn

http://coord.info/GC1259 23-06-2001 Kougarok

http://coord.info/GC7584 16-07-2002 Toothy Travel Bug Cache

http://coord.info/GC784C 28-07-2002 ECO ESTRATO

http://coord.info/GC784E 15-05-2002 ECO ARCOIRIS

http://coord.info/GC82F9 19-08-2002 Necans Old Cabin

http://coord.info/GC89FF 20-07-2002 Puppet Theatre stash on the Mont Blanc

http://coord.info/GCC560 13-08-2002 Gold Lake

http://coord.info/GCC65F 18-01-2003 Geocache

http://coord.info/GCC763 20-12-2002 ECO RISUEÑO

http://coord.info/GCC767 19-01-2003 ECO RESPLANDESCIENTE

http://coord.info/GCCFC1 05-02-2003 Penguin Dance

http://coord.info/GCDECD 04-03-2003 Antarctic Views

http://coord.info/GCE0A6 08-02-2003 Le gardien de Safar

http://coord.info/GCG822 19-07-2002 Rainbow Hydrothermal Vents

http://coord.info/GCGABB 12-06-2003 Shore Lunch with Bazooka Joe

http://coord.info/GCGGGV 11-07-2003 They Would Have Loved It

http://coord.info/GCGQNJ 08-08-2003 Drury Days

http://coord.info/GCHAYZ 07-12-2003 The Navigator's Crater

http://coord.info/GCHC1R 27-11-2003 Umm Dabbadib

http://coord.info/GCHM71 01-02-2004 El segundo

http://coord.info/GCJFH5 12-05-2004 Yi Island Cahce

http://coord.info/GCJFH6 14-05-2004 Louji Mountain Celestial Being Cave Cache

http://coord.info/GCJFH9 13-05-2004 Hot Springs Falls Cache

http://coord.info/GCJZV0 14-07-2004 Shu Fly Dont Bother Me

http://coord.info/GCKPTP 03-10-2004 BushCrawl

http://coord.info/GCN17F 11-01-2004 islote del sur

 

... not that many!!! Good hunting!!!!

Edited by JPreto
Link to comment

Captain Nemo's Lookout aka Captain Pomin Rock was published 9 days ago. It's an oldie!

 

This is the cache:

http://coord.info/GC57TCA 03-08-2001 Captain Nemo's Lookout aka Captain Pomin Rock

 

Copy/Paste from the search results... So there may be errors that I will correct in the first post!

 

Actually the error is not from the database itself it can be:

 

1) the reviewer that approved the cache with that date.

2) the user that after publication of the cache changed it.

 

Yet another thing, why does GS allow users to edit the hidden date after a cache has been published. It´s just allowing things like this to happen and more work for them to control. :blink:

Edited by JPreto
Link to comment

This is the cache:

http://coord.info/GC57TCA 03-08-2001 Captain Nemo's Lookout aka Captain Pomin Rock

 

Copy/Paste from the search results... So there may be errors that I will correct in the first post!

 

Actually the error is not from the database itself it can be:

 

1) the reviewer that approved the cache with that date.

2) the user that after publication of the cache changed it.

 

Yet another thing, why does GS allow users to edit the hidden date after a cache has been published. It´s just allowing things like this to happen and more work for them to control. :blink:

Why is that wrong? Why shouldn't it be allowed? Read the cache description and it makes perfectly good sense to set the placed date as it is.

 

I've done it myself twice.

 

Once was for re-listing a cache that was previously archived:

what a view!

 

The other was more for fun and the theme of the cache:

Diez años en la fabricación

Link to comment

Another error in the list

http://coord.info/GC89FF 20-07-2002 Puppet Theatre stash on the Mont Blanc

This cache now has a "Found It" log. (aka through down)

 

Funny enough, the TD and FOUND IT log was posted today, the same day this list was created... Let´s see if it holds out and the CO doesn´t delete the log...

 

Anyway the list on the first post will be updated regularly!

Link to comment

This is the cache:

http://coord.info/GC57TCA 03-08-2001 Captain Nemo's Lookout aka Captain Pomin Rock

 

Copy/Paste from the search results... So there may be errors that I will correct in the first post!

 

Actually the error is not from the database itself it can be:

 

1) the reviewer that approved the cache with that date.

2) the user that after publication of the cache changed it.

 

Yet another thing, why does GS allow users to edit the hidden date after a cache has been published. It´s just allowing things like this to happen and more work for them to control. :blink:

Why is that wrong? Why shouldn't it be allowed? Read the cache description and it makes perfectly good sense to set the placed date as it is.

 

No, no, no, no, no. That's ridiculous. Did the owner change that date himself? I mean people are going to be able to use that for a Jasmer Challenge? Nope, I can't get down with that one.

Link to comment

Why is that wrong? Why shouldn't it be allowed? Read the cache description and it makes perfectly good sense to set the placed date as it is.

 

No, no, no, no, no. That's ridiculous. Did the owner change that date himself? I mean people are going to be able to use that for a Jasmer Challenge? Nope, I can't get down with that one.

 

I'm torn. The cache really was placed in 08/2001, if the description is correct.

 

Should geocaching guideline/policy be determined by a side game (Jasmer in this case)?

Link to comment

This is the cache:

http://coord.info/GC57TCA 03-08-2001 Captain Nemo's Lookout aka Captain Pomin Rock

 

Copy/Paste from the search results... So there may be errors that I will correct in the first post!

 

Actually the error is not from the database itself it can be:

 

1) the reviewer that approved the cache with that date.

2) the user that after publication of the cache changed it.

 

Yet another thing, why does GS allow users to edit the hidden date after a cache has been published. It´s just allowing things like this to happen and more work for them to control. :blink:

Why is that wrong? Why shouldn't it be allowed? Read the cache description and it makes perfectly good sense to set the placed date as it is.

 

No, no, no, no, no. That's ridiculous. Did the owner change that date himself? I mean people are going to be able to use that for a Jasmer Challenge? Nope, I can't get down with that one.

 

If I was the CO of a Jasmer Challenge, I would ban any of those extreme level "fake" caches but I dont know if GS will stand on my side. I would say something like this... no caches will be allowed if there is more than 2 years between the published date and the placement date.

Link to comment

This is the cache:

http://coord.info/GC57TCA 03-08-2001 Captain Nemo's Lookout aka Captain Pomin Rock

 

Copy/Paste from the search results... So there may be errors that I will correct in the first post!

 

Actually the error is not from the database itself it can be:

 

1) the reviewer that approved the cache with that date.

2) the user that after publication of the cache changed it.

 

Yet another thing, why does GS allow users to edit the hidden date after a cache has been published. It´s just allowing things like this to happen and more work for them to control. :blink:

Why is that wrong? Why shouldn't it be allowed? Read the cache description and it makes perfectly good sense to set the placed date as it is.

 

No, no, no, no, no. That's ridiculous. Did the owner change that date himself? I mean people are going to be able to use that for a Jasmer Challenge? Nope, I can't get down with that one.

 

If I was the CO of a Jasmer Challenge, I would ban any of those extreme level "fake" caches but I dont know if GS will stand on my side. I would say something like this... no caches will be allowed if there is more than 2 years between the published date and the placement date.

If an obvious total fake, I agree. There was one I saw with a hide date in the 1970's ... WTF?

If the page clearly explains that it is really the real thing, .... maybe it should be okay. I have a cache near me hid in July 2003. Owners are last logged in 2007. I found it. The can needs a little help. Another area cacher mentioned "adopting" it.

Adoption isn't possible without the CO present.

If you put the same kind of container in the exact location would you consider keeping the date?

 

If not.......... how do you feel about adoptions?

Link to comment

Why is that wrong? Why shouldn't it be allowed? Read the cache description and it makes perfectly good sense to set the placed date as it is.

 

No, no, no, no, no. That's ridiculous. Did the owner change that date himself? I mean people are going to be able to use that for a Jasmer Challenge? Nope, I can't get down with that one.

 

I'm torn. The cache really was placed in 08/2001, if the description is correct.

 

Should geocaching guideline/policy be determined by a side game (Jasmer in this case)?

 

Oh goodness, ya' got me there. I have hypocrite written across my forehead. In almost every other case, I'd say guideline/policy should not be determined by a side game. But I loves old historic caches and the Jasmer. Who hates the Jasmer? No one. :)

 

If I was the CO of a Jasmer Challenge, I would ban any of those extreme level "fake" caches but I dont know if GS will stand on my side. I would say something like this... no caches will be allowed if there is more than 2 years between the published date and the placement date.

 

Hmm. Could you ban one from use? I do actually own a 2001 mini Jasmer challenge (only the 12 months of 2001, obviously), and there is indeed a controversy. I actually mention the cache by name, and I guess you could say "discourage" it's use, but say that I accept it.

 

I'll give you the short version. It's an extremely rare (for a northern climate) cache in NW Ohio with a January 2001 placement date, specifically 1/23/2001. But it's an obvious typo, and the guy actually placed two caches 11 months later on 12/23/2001, and "missed a 2 in the 12" on his keyboard for one of them. At least two older caches in Ohio (the real oldest active cache in greater Toledo, and the real oldest active cache in all of Ohio) have the story about this controversy on their cache pages stating that their caches are much older. :huh:

 

etarace: don't want more quotes, but no, I'd go with the date of the new listing. This thing at the Lake Tahoe cache is the first I've even heard of this.

 

EDIT: P.S. Here's the latest log for the cache with the wrong placement date, which is in reality the 38th oldest active cache in Ohio. Just seeing if I can get JPreto worked up. :lol:

 

Finally get to log this one. Been waiting for a good milestone for the oldest active cache in Ohio so this will be find #2000 for me. My youngest & I made our way over here after an appointment. The bugs got thick but we carried on. We didn't realize there had been a fire but were glad to that this old beauty lives on. TFTC

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

etarace: don't want more quotes, but no, I'd go with the date of the new listing. This thing at the Lake Tahoe cache is the first I've even heard of this.

 

A - So if the owner was active and I could adopt the cache, I could keep the original 2003 hide date.

 

B - Since the owner is not available, if the cache gets archived for being a rusty bucket with no active CO to maintain it - if I then put a new ammo can in the exact location ....new date?

 

C - Weirder twist. What if the original owners return to the game. New can, same location, same owner. New date?

 

If B and C are correct (which I'm inclined to believe they are) then why is A correct? Why do we even have adopting of caches, for any reason other than to "keep this great old cache going" emphasis on the age. The adopted owner can place a great, identical "new" cache.

 

I'm not against adopted caches. I'm a fan of "old" ones. But these things do seem contradictory to me.

Link to comment

etarace: don't want more quotes, but no, I'd go with the date of the new listing. This thing at the Lake Tahoe cache is the first I've even heard of this.

 

A - So if the owner was active and I could adopt the cache, I could keep the original 2003 hide date.

 

B - Since the owner is not available, if the cache gets archived for being a rusty bucket with no active CO to maintain it - if I then put a new ammo can in the exact location ....new date?

 

C - Weirder twist. What if the original owners return to the game. New can, same location, same owner. New date?

 

If B and C are correct (which I'm inclined to believe they are) then why is A correct? Why do we even have adopting of caches, for any reason other than to "keep this great old cache going" emphasis on the age. The adopted owner can place a great, identical "new" cache.

 

I'm not against adopted caches. I'm a fan of "old" ones. But these things do seem contradictory to me.

 

I think the answer is actually very simple: "PROPERTY RIGHTS".

 

CASE B - If you "accidentally find a cache" that is archived then the cache isn´t yours. You should actually post a note in the original cache page and wait for someone to complain the cache ownership. It´s like finding a car in the street with the keys on, is the car yours, even if it´s there for 10 years... So, if you place a new cache, because by the LAW you can´t place that cache (even if the person is dead, imagine, the cache belongs to their inheritors). Maybe there is a law that after some years (probably varies on countries) you can claim it yours...

 

CASE C - If the CO (the one that placed the original cache) comes back to the game there are 2 possibilities:

1) Cache is archived. In this case it´s up to GS to allow a unarchive of the cache, so the date should be kept.

2) Cache is active. Just a regular maintenance substitution of a cache, the date should be kept.

 

CASE A - Simple adoption case if the cache is active (you don´t even need GS aproval, there is a automatic way to do it), same GC and same date... If the cache is archived is again up to GS to decide, but in the guidelines they are specific saying that a "cache shouldn´t be unarchived for the purpose of adoption".

 

So, these are my opinions based on the rules of the game... any other/different opinions?

Link to comment

Why is that wrong? Why shouldn't it be allowed? Read the cache description and it makes perfectly good sense to set the placed date as it is.

 

I've done it myself twice.

 

Once was for re-listing a cache that was previously archived:

what a view!

 

The other was more for fun and the theme of the cache:

Diez años en la fabricación

I wasn´t going to answer but I thought this might be actually important:

 

1) So you find (physically) an archived cache by chance or just because you like to search for archived caches.

2) Since you can´t adopt because the CO is absent you create a new GC.

3) You say the hidden date is the date the original CO first placed it.

 

If you can´t see a problem in this I can:

 

a ) The cache is not your property, it is the COs or their inheritances.

b ) You actually hide (the new/old cache) in some specific date, that for me is the new hiding date since you are now claiming to be the new owner, even without the old owner permit.

 

Soon enough, if cases like these go public, we will start to see many old caches reborn like phoenix, from the aches, just go to the original place of the cache and say: "I found the old cache, it was so damaged that I replaced with a new one but since the cache is archived a created a new GC code with the old date"... GAME ON!!!

 

Lots of old caches can be just reborn with new GC codes but maintaining the dates... Can´t you see a problem in this... well I can!

Edited by JPreto
Link to comment

Why is that wrong? Why shouldn't it be allowed? Read the cache description and it makes perfectly good sense to set the placed date as it is.

 

I've done it myself twice.

 

Once was for re-listing a cache that was previously archived:

what a view!

 

The other was more for fun and the theme of the cache:

Diez años en la fabricación

I wasn´t going to answer but I thought this might be actually important:

 

1) So you find (physically) an archived cache by chance or just because you like to search for archived caches.

2) Since you can´t adopt because the CO is absent you create a new GC.

3) You say the hidden date is the date the original CO first placed it.

 

If you can´t see a problem in this I can:

 

a ) The cache is not your property, it is the COs or their inheritances.

b ) You actually hide (the new/old cache) in some specific date, that for me is the new hiding date since you are now claiming to be the new owner, even without the old owner permit.

 

Soon enough, if cases like these go public, we will start to see many old caches reborn like phoenix, from the aches, just go to the original place of the cache and say: "I found the old cache, it was so damaged that I replaced with a new one but since the cache is archived a created a new GC code with the old date"... GAME ON!!!

 

Lots of old caches can be just reborn with new GC codes but maintaining the dates... Can´t you see a problem in this... well I can!

Well, I found the cache before it was archived. I figured there was no way it was muggled, so I checked on it a bit after five years from when it was archived and sure enough, there it was. I contacted the original owner and was given permission to relist it. It's the exact cache that I found in 2003, not a replacement. None of your so called problems are applicable here. So what's the problem?

Link to comment

etarace: don't want more quotes, but no, I'd go with the date of the new listing. This thing at the Lake Tahoe cache is the first I've even heard of this.

 

A - So if the owner was active and I could adopt the cache, I could keep the original 2003 hide date.

 

B - Since the owner is not available, if the cache gets archived for being a rusty bucket with no active CO to maintain it - if I then put a new ammo can in the exact location ....new date?

 

C - Weirder twist. What if the original owners return to the game. New can, same location, same owner. New date?

 

If B and C are correct (which I'm inclined to believe they are) then why is A correct? Why do we even have adopting of caches, for any reason other than to "keep this great old cache going" emphasis on the age. The adopted owner can place a great, identical "new" cache.

 

I'm not against adopted caches. I'm a fan of "old" ones. But these things do seem contradictory to me.

 

I think the answer is actually very simple: "PROPERTY RIGHTS".

 

CASE B - If you "accidentally find a cache" that is archived then the cache isn´t yours. You should actually post a note in the original cache page and wait for someone to complain the cache ownership. It´s like finding a car in the street with the keys on, is the car yours, even if it´s there for 10 years... So, if you place a new cache, because by the LAW you can´t place that cache (even if the person is dead, imagine, the cache belongs to their inheritors). Maybe there is a law that after some years (probably varies on countries) you can claim it yours...

 

CASE C - If the CO (the one that placed the original cache) comes back to the game there are 2 possibilities:

1) Cache is archived. In this case it´s up to GS to allow a unarchive of the cache, so the date should be kept.

2) Cache is active. Just a regular maintenance substitution of a cache, the date should be kept.

 

CASE A - Simple adoption case if the cache is active (you don´t even need GS aproval, there is a automatic way to do it), same GC and same date... If the cache is archived is again up to GS to decide, but in the guidelines they are specific saying that a "cache shouldn´t be unarchived for the purpose of adoption".

 

So, these are my opinions based on the rules of the game... any other/different opinions?

Your answer makes my head hurt and I'm pretty sure it isn't because English is a second language for me. I think it is because you didn't look at it the way I asked.

 

In situation B there is a cache I have found in the past. Wolfe's Den for example. The cache owners were last online 2007. This cache needs help. It is rusty and falling to junk. The logs are damp and/or mildewed pulp. I can't "adopt" it officially since the CO is not in the game.

If it gets archived for the such poor condition, I COULD (if I chose) put a brand spanking new cache at the identical location. New container, new logbook, new swag, new everything that I bought with my own money from fighting indigestion or whatever it is I do during the day to make my moolah. There is no question of me stealing property from the Ghost of Team Paddlin' Posse or their grandchildren.

This makes a new cache with a new date.

Fine.

 

However, if I somehow get to adopt this cache because Team Paddlin' Posse's Ghost logs on to GC and allows it.... I would STILL put out a new container, new log, new swag entirely new cache that I bought with my own money that I earn pushing drugs on convicted criminals all day ..... so, the "cache" is exactly the same "item" that it was in situation B. But somehow this way I get to keep the date?

 

It seems odd.

Link to comment

Your answer makes my head hurt and I'm pretty sure it isn't because English is a second language for me. I think it is because you didn't look at it the way I asked.

 

In situation B there is a cache I have found in the past. Wolfe's Den for example. The cache owners were last online 2007. This cache needs help. It is rusty and falling to junk. The logs are damp and/or mildewed pulp. I can't "adopt" it officially since the CO is not in the game.

If it gets archived for the such poor condition, I COULD (if I chose) put a brand spanking new cache at the identical location. New container, new logbook, new swag, new everything that I bought with my own money from fighting indigestion or whatever it is I do during the day to make my moolah. There is no question of me stealing property from the Ghost of Team Paddlin' Posse or their grandchildren.

This makes a new cache with a new date.

Fine.

 

However, if I somehow get to adopt this cache because Team Paddlin' Posse's Ghost logs on to GC and allows it.... I would STILL put out a new container, new log, new swag entirely new cache that I bought with my own money that I earn pushing drugs on convicted criminals all day ..... so, the "cache" is exactly the same "item" that it was in situation B. But somehow this way I get to keep the date?

 

It seems odd.

If you adopt the cache, you're keeping the GC code/listing alive, not necessarily the cache. The container itself can be changed as often as needed and it's still considered the same geocache.

Link to comment

Why is that wrong? Why shouldn't it be allowed? Read the cache description and it makes perfectly good sense to set the placed date as it is.

 

I've done it myself twice.

 

Once was for re-listing a cache that was previously archived:

what a view!

 

The other was more for fun and the theme of the cache:

Diez años en la fabricación

I wasn´t going to answer but I thought this might be actually important:

 

1) So you find (physically) an archived cache by chance or just because you like to search for archived caches.

2) Since you can´t adopt because the CO is absent you create a new GC.

3) You say the hidden date is the date the original CO first placed it.

 

If you can´t see a problem in this I can:

 

a ) The cache is not your property, it is the COs or their inheritances.

b ) You actually hide (the new/old cache) in some specific date, that for me is the new hiding date since you are now claiming to be the new owner, even without the old owner permit.

 

Soon enough, if cases like these go public, we will start to see many old caches reborn like phoenix, from the aches, just go to the original place of the cache and say: "I found the old cache, it was so damaged that I replaced with a new one but since the cache is archived a created a new GC code with the old date"... GAME ON!!!

 

Lots of old caches can be just reborn with new GC codes but maintaining the dates... Can´t you see a problem in this... well I can!

Well, I found the cache before it was archived. I figured there was no way it was muggled, so I checked on it a bit after five years from when it was archived and sure enough, there it was. I contacted the original owner and was given permission to relist it. It's the exact cache that I found in 2003, not a replacement. None of your so called problems are applicable here. So what's the problem?

 

Personally I would refuse to find your cache as I think the date is fake and I wouldn't want it to be a part of my stats, that's just my opinion.

Link to comment

Why is that wrong? Why shouldn't it be allowed? Read the cache description and it makes perfectly good sense to set the placed date as it is.

 

I've done it myself twice.

 

Once was for re-listing a cache that was previously archived:

what a view!

 

The other was more for fun and the theme of the cache:

Diez años en la fabricación

I wasn´t going to answer but I thought this might be actually important:

 

1) So you find (physically) an archived cache by chance or just because you like to search for archived caches.

2) Since you can´t adopt because the CO is absent you create a new GC.

3) You say the hidden date is the date the original CO first placed it.

 

If you can´t see a problem in this I can:

 

a ) The cache is not your property, it is the COs or their inheritances.

b ) You actually hide (the new/old cache) in some specific date, that for me is the new hiding date since you are now claiming to be the new owner, even without the old owner permit.

 

Soon enough, if cases like these go public, we will start to see many old caches reborn like phoenix, from the aches, just go to the original place of the cache and say: "I found the old cache, it was so damaged that I replaced with a new one but since the cache is archived a created a new GC code with the old date"... GAME ON!!!

 

Lots of old caches can be just reborn with new GC codes but maintaining the dates... Can´t you see a problem in this... well I can!

Well, I found the cache before it was archived. I figured there was no way it was muggled, so I checked on it a bit after five years from when it was archived and sure enough, there it was. I contacted the original owner and was given permission to relist it. It's the exact cache that I found in 2003, not a replacement. None of your so called problems are applicable here. So what's the problem?

 

Personally I would refuse to find your cache as I think the date is fake and I wouldn't want it to be a part of my stats, that's just my opinion.

 

I would find the cache but edit and lock the placed date in my GSAK database to show the new placement date. Old geocaches should have old GC numbers.

Link to comment

Your answer makes my head hurt and I'm pretty sure it isn't because English is a second language for me. I think it is because you didn't look at it the way I asked.

 

In situation B there is a cache I have found in the past. Wolfe's Den for example. The cache owners were last online 2007. This cache needs help. It is rusty and falling to junk. The logs are damp and/or mildewed pulp. I can't "adopt" it officially since the CO is not in the game.

If it gets archived for the such poor condition, I COULD (if I chose) put a brand spanking new cache at the identical location. New container, new logbook, new swag, new everything that I bought with my own money from fighting indigestion or whatever it is I do during the day to make my moolah. There is no question of me stealing property from the Ghost of Team Paddlin' Posse or their grandchildren.

This makes a new cache with a new date.

Fine.

 

However, if I somehow get to adopt this cache because Team Paddlin' Posse's Ghost logs on to GC and allows it.... I would STILL put out a new container, new log, new swag entirely new cache that I bought with my own money that I earn pushing drugs on convicted criminals all day ..... so, the "cache" is exactly the same "item" that it was in situation B. But somehow this way I get to keep the date?

 

It seems odd.

If you adopt the cache, you're keeping the GC code/listing alive, not necessarily the cache. The container itself can be changed as often as needed and it's still considered the same geocache.

But why? I wasn't even in geocaching in 2003 when my example was place. Theoretically, I could adopt it. If I did, it would be fully replaced. I have to wonder what the purpose of this "adoption" would be other than to keep the AGE of the item going.

New container, new contents, new log, new owner. In fact, if there is some sentimental story about why the place was selected I wouldn't have participated and might not know about it. I might even change the cache listing page (I can after all, since it is now "mine").

 

So, what is the purpose of keeping the listing/GC code alive?

Link to comment

Hi,

 

Here is another 2003 geocache never found. A log was made as found in 2001 (before it was placed), but after looking at the geocacher's finds, stats and ridiculous name, it is obviously a log that should be deleted.

 

Not the north pole, but you can see it from here

http://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GCHC2E_not-the-north-pole-but-you-can-see-it-from-here

 

As for Gold Lake, I am taking a hard look at an expedition to this one.... and I think I have found one of the persons who placed it. In the process of trying to contact him and get some details.

 

Any adventurous geocachers out there looking for a great trip? I might need a partner for this one!

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...
×
×
  • Create New...