I know I have seen this in these forums, but can't find it. Here are two situations friend chazcone and I encountered this past week:

1. We were hunting a cache together and I found one. It was the wrong one, but I signed the log for us. Later, back at the computer, I figured out which one it was. I think it is O.K. to log as a "found." What is the rule?

2. On another hunt, we found where the cache had been hidden (found both sides of 2" of Velcro stuck under an electrical box exactly where the coords said it was). An email to the cache owner said, "Sure, that was a find. I will replace it as soon as I can." What is the rule?

Thanks for your input!

1. I think you log the one that you found.

2. This one is a gut thing. Personally, I would log it at not found or with a note "this cache should be archived". I would not log it as found since I didn't find the cache. Different people do it different ways. Some do take the find if they found an area where they think the cache was. Then again someone might find the cache later. In your case, you found the velcro attachment. The cache is most likely gone. I still would not log it as found since I didn't sign the logbook.

The only rule that geocaching.com directly enforces, is that both the hider and hunter have to agree that it is find. If the hider doesn’t agree they can delete the find log. If the hunter doesn’t think it is find, no one can make him log it as a find.

Within these boundaries the hunter can decide what they consider a find. My rule and that is all that it is my rule.

For physical cache, I have to find the cache and sign the log book. If I don’t find it for any reason, I don’t consider it a find. It doesn’t matter if it is my fault, (I just don’t find it), the hiders fault (they have very bad coordinates), or someone else’s fault (the cache was stolen). If I don’t find and sign the logbook it is not a find. For virtuals it is a find if I do what ever the "hider" requires.

So for me I would call 1) a find, because it was found even if accidentally, but I wouldn’t call 2)a find because it wasn’t found.

But you have to make your own decision as to what you consider a find, and if the hider doesn’t delete it, then it is a find.

Thanks, Mtn-man and Allen. It seems logical as you both say, if I sign a logbook (traditional cache) it is found. Otherwise, not found. Good basic rule, I would say.

To me things are not always black and white. Sometimes they are grey.

I've logged a cache, and feel quite good about it, where I didn't open the box and didn't sign the log.

Gads! Why did I do that? Because I saw the cache box - had my eyes on it. But, because muggles were close by and after waiting over an hour for them to clear out, I had to leave. I put forth the effort and found the cache. I did send a note to the hider telling her what had happened and she allowed the find.

Bottom line? Your sense of right and wrong coupled with the desires of the hider should prevail. Not some arbitrary "I didn't sign the log" ethic.

In Trailerman's examples, they're both legitimate logs as long as the hiders agree. In the first, you found a cache (I'm curious about the coords though). In the second you found the right location but the cache had gone missing and the hider gave you an OK.

Life to is too short to quibble about these kinds of nuances.

Just mho, you may ignore as you please!

See ya on the hunt!

quote:

---

Originally posted by DaRebel:
...muggles were close by and after waiting over an hour for them to clear out, I had to leave. I put forth the effort and found the cache. I did send a note to the hider telling her what had happened and she allowed the find...

---

I have no problem with you calling that a find. I had similar thing happen to me, and I hope you would have no problem with me not calling it a find.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DaRebel:
In Trailerman's examples, they're both legitimate logs as long as the hiders agree. In the first, you found a cache (I'm curious about the coords though).

---

I thought I had heard it said before, if the hider and hunter agree it was a "find," then it was a "find." That works for a virtual, micro, etc. also.

The unknown "find" turned out to be "Between the Rocks, Where the Trolls Live". I had not downloaded it because it was above my radar (difficulty 4) for the day.

quote:

---

Originally posted by trailerman:
I thought I had heard it said before, if the hider and hunter agree it was a "find," then it was a "find." That works for a virtual, micro, etc. also.

---

Which is what I said at beginning and end of my first reply

quote:

---

The only rule that geocaching.com directly enforces, is that both the hider and hunter have to agree that it is find.


But you have to make your own decision as to what you consider a find, and if the hider doesn’t delete it, then it is a find.

---

I just listed what I consider as a find for me, everyone else has to make their own decision.

quote:

---

Originally posted by AllenLacy:
and I hope you would have no problem with me not calling it a find.

---

Nope, I wouldn't. As has been written and apparently agreed to, if the hider and cacher agree it's a find; it's a find. If they don't, it's not. Heck, logging the cache online is subject to the whims of the cache owner at all times anyway.

Would I go back another time and open that box? Maybe. If local, yes I sure would. It wouldn't count as a new find, of course. I'd just want to look in the box and sign the log.

See ya on the hunt!

On the question of "is it a find" would you consider it a find if you found the actual cache, found it completely soaking wet, and the logbook destroyed(thus, unsignable), and did not have a new logbook on hand to replace the old one with...

Personally, I had one like this(http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=15067) that I found, but didn't have the time to go back to my car and return with a fresh logbook.

As another note, I have since found out that the cache owner has moved away from the cache, and that he is looking for someone to take it over or else will archive it, although he has no means by which to retrieve it.