OK, were just getting used to cable internet, so forgive the 2 empty
replies. We usually lurk in the listserv, but this thread of logging finds
has hit a sensitive spot, so we feel compelled to respond.
We live in the West Valley, most of our caching is spent one day a
week traveling 20+ miles to the East Valley to where the majority of the
caching is. It is difficult to be sooo close to a cache, and not to be able
to log it because of one reason or another (ie, too many people, losing
daylight, ect), and knowing it will be another week before we can try it
again. Most urban caches are designed to be difficult due to the presence of
people in the area, so that is just a built in device. BUT, we would never
consider logging a find unless we sign the log. One good example:
We were trying a certain cache that required figuring out a few clues
in a large shopping mall to get the coordinates. After finding the clues and
entering the cords, the cache appeared to be a mile away in a neighborhood.
The GPS pointed to the front (gated) porch of a home, where we could plainly
see a container. Being 8PM we decided not to try for the cache and disturb
the home owners. BUT, instead of logging the find (we were in sight of the
cache?) we posted a note and sent the owners an email. The cache owners
responded that although we DID have the right cords, we were NOT in the right
location! DOH! After checking, we found we entered the cords wrong in the
GPS! At a later date we sheepishly found the cache and logged the find in the
logbook.
Now the moral of this long winded story is: Would it have counted if
we would have just logged the find, even though we were in the wrong area,
and we were sure we were right?
Technically anyone can log finds without actually finding or logging
the cache, but I would think the whole sport is FINDING the cache, and
logging the logbook. I believe that's why most microcaches only have just the
logbook or sheet.
Our 2 cents worth and humble opinion, thanks,
J&T& Harry - Team Spring
(text/plain)