Requriements for logging a "Found"

Posted: Fri Jun 25, 2010 11:32 pm

Can someome point me in the right direction as to were it is listed on GC.com that you need to sign a log to claim a find. I had a cache disaper,I disabled it, and the next day someone posted say "We found the velcro but the cache was gone" and claimed it as a found. I deleted the log, but want to send them a note saying what the GC rules are for finding a cache.

WGA Member Joined: 2007-11-26 Posts: 3259

http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx

"Logging of All Physical Caches"

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:18 am

Looks like you're going to have to place one of those "invisible" containers at that location, Cheezehead. wink

Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 10:27 am

sandlanders wrote:

Looks like you're going to have to place one of those "invisible" containers at that location, Cheezehead. wink

I have , twice and at shue's pond, and that disappeared also.

WGA Member Joined: 2009-08-17 Posts: 126

I’m not a “word” professional, but the way I read this is [can] and not [must]!
BTY – I’m not the offender. The only times I recorded a find without entering it into the log book is if the book was wet or full…

Logging of All Physical Caches

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 2:15 pm

grandpa_r wrote:

I’m not a “word” professional, but the way I read this is [can] and not [must]!
BTY – I’m not the offender. The only times I recorded a find without entering it into the log book is if the book was wet or full…

Logging of All Physical Caches

Geocaches can be logged online as Found once the physical log has been signed.

I believe the usage of "can" implies you don't have to log online. As in it's an option to log online.

Further, the use of the word "once" implies that one must sign the physical log to log online. Or in other words, you earn your online log by signing the physical log.

Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 2:33 pm

Touchy subject to some point.

I would have mixed feelings and truly not sure where I stand myself. If the cache was gone and there was no evidence of where the cache was one could argue that how would they know if they truly found the cache. But since they found the velcro where the cache should have been they did find i's place of hiding. Is it their fault for it not being there? No... Should they get the Smile

for it I'm not sure... They made the search, they found the spot.

The other reason I kind of lean towards the signing of the log optional, only under abnormal circumstances, like grandpa_r the log is wet or not singable. I ran into the wet log quite a few times and will still claim it as found. Not my fault the log was wet and could not be used. The only other time I loged a Smile

with out signing the log was on a cache that was very hard to get to, hard to find, and was a micro. I took a pen with me found the cache but could not get the darn pen to work. Short of stabbing my finger and writing in blood I was hosed.

I guess that the log should be signed given all things are equal. but the circumstance must be judged, but that is still subjective.

Well that was a lot said, that made no definite statement. Rolling Eyes

WGA Member Joined: 2007-11-26 Posts: 3259

The directive of the powers that be is that the physical cache log must be signed in order to log a find and, furthermore, that it is the responsibility of the cache owner to ensure that finds are valid and enforce the signature requirement. A search of these forums will find comments to that effect.

Whether the cache owner chooses to enforce said requirement and fulfill said responsibility is of course another matter altogether.

Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 5:21 pm

Found a couple of cache containers frozen in pretty good, but we were able to pry them out and open. Ran across a few full logs, but we managed to squeeze initials on there somewhere. Have seen plenty of damp log sheets, but we flapped them in the wind or dried them in the sun enough to get a signature on them. Even had the pen quit working, but we eked out enough ink to scribble a name. Went back to the car for another pen and found ourselves only .25 miles from that cache when we did the next one, so walked back from cache #2 to cache #1 to make the signature more legible.

We don't check on our cache logs much to see who signs them. If an online log looks legit, we leave it. If the online log suggests we need to do something about a cache, we'll go check. When we do routine cache checks, we look at the log sheets, but we don't always compare one-to-one with online logs. Maybe we should check more closely, but if people want to "fudge" on their finds, that's their problem.

A piece of velcro tape is not a find for us. Was it really from the cache or not? We don't know, so we'll say as such in our DNF.

But thanks for the link to the exact wording from GC, gotta run. I'm sure it helped answer Cheezehead's original question. Now I'll send him the link for our source of those invisible containers we use... wink

Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 7:03 pm

sandlanders wrote:

. Now I'll send him the link for our source of those invisible containers we use... wink

I KNOW what invisible container you use, remember? I showed ya how to use them.

Posted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 8:13 pm

cheezehead wrote:

sandlanders wrote:

. Now I'll send him the link for our source of those invisible containers we use... wink

I KNOW what invisible container you use, remember? I showed ya how to use them.

Oh, yeah... But we shelled out the extra bucks for the invisible paint. Razz

No one finds them... no muggles, no cachers. wink

Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 5:46 am

AH! Were to start. We have found 4 caches so far that were not there, but there was evidence that the cache was suppose to be there,I.E. Valcro, camo lid, or bottle, a pocket. I did not log it but e-mailed the owner of the cache about the condition, or we repaired the cache with a new log, or a container, but always e-mailed the owner. They at all times gave us the find if the cache turned up missing, and we knew were it was suppose to be. I'm not about to travel miles to a cache and its not there and then go back again.
Two people in a row didn't find one of my cache's (Sparky's). that was a clue to me, we went out to check and it was gone. Some hunter probably took it. Anyways we replaced it and gave the find to the cachers.
The ecorangers did that twice for us.
Bottom line shouldn't it be up to the owner to give the find?

Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 5:49 am

P.S. Another clue would be a bunch of DNF's in a row. After yours and the owner checks it out. If I was the owner we would give them all the find.

Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 5:52 am

We have one that use to be velcro but was stolen. We replaced it with a nano and it says so on the cache page. Often people tell us they found the velcro so it must be gone. It is pretty close to our house so we check it often.
So velcro does not always mean it is missing.
TE

Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 7:04 am

Timberline Echoes wrote:

We have one that use to be velcro but was stolen. We replaced it with a nano and it says so on the cache page. Often people tell us they found the velcro so it must be gone. It is pretty close to our house so we check it often.
So velcro does not always mean it is missing.
TE

Perhaps the velcro should be removed?