ethos for replacing logbooks, containers?

[POLKYS QUEST]

Just returning to caching after an extended absence and was browsing through some old logs when I noticed some derogative comments when I replaced a cache that had gone missing? The cache was in an isolated location at the end of Yorke Peninsular with incredible views which definitely justified a cache. The previous finder (A very seasoned cacher) failed to find the cache in the obvious spot and after an extensive search myself I also failed to find it! Instead of just placing a dnf log and leading other cachers on a goose chase I replaced the cache with one I had made up in the car. I logged the cache as a find on .com as well as a note saying:

"As with firesafe couldn't find it even though gz was very obvious!! It had all the small rocks pulled out and placed on the nearby shrub. I had a cache made up in the car for placement else where so I replaced the cache as this was one spot that definetly needed saving!! If the original does turn up please delete my log!"

I'm sure the other cachers (barring two) who found my replacement cache were happy with what I did and I had no objections from the cache owner either! Guess you can't please everyone

[Philipp]

I consider replacing a cache before contacting the owner to be very rude. How should I know it's really gone? Replacing missing or broken parts (logbook or the container) is acceptable as long there is still a part left which can be identified as the cache.

[POLKYS QUEST]

Remember this isn't just some cache in an urban park but an isolated cache! I can't contact the owner and come back the following day and replace it? lol

[caughtatwork]

It's called a "throw down" cache and I have only done it one occassion when I found the lid but not box. There is no guarantee the cache isn't somewhere else and there are now two containers there.

Log a DNF, enjoy the location, leave the area as you found it.

[Team Wibble]

I wouldn't replace a cache I couldn't find unless I had contacted the owner first to absolutely guarantee the old container was missing. Otherwise, I think its quite presumptuous to do so, remote or not.

Not QUITE the same thing, but just this weekend I did some maintenance on one of my own caches that had ended up with two containers at GZ. I placed the second container myself, after the original went "missing". Turns out, a previous finder had moved the container, several metres (and a few metres in elevation too), far enough away that I missed it on my check for "cache creep". It seems that in the meantime, finders were finding either one or the other container, signing different log books, reporting TBs as missing, or managing to log TBs that were supposed to be in the missing container. It was, quite frankly, a mess. This is what you risk when you replace a container without being absolutely sure the old one is gone.

I know of a cacher who has had THREE separate caches at one of their remote cache locations because other cachers have taken it upon themselves to replace it, when it was never missing in the first place.
For that reason alone I don't think its a good idea. If you couldn't find the cache, then it is a DNF.

[POLKYS QUEST]

replacing the cache because you found the lid is no different to replacing a cache in the obvious spot where the area had been disturbed? Well to me anyway lol ! Like I said if it was a throw away urban cache then I wouldn't bother but this was an ISOLATED cache!

[Lucy]

You shouldn't have logged a find - you DID NOT find it. As for replacing the cache, because you did not find it, you can never be sure it wasn't still there. When hiding a cache the cache owner agrees to maintain the cache. You should have logged a DNF to alert the owner that something may have been wrong. They could have confirmed it existence or replaced it as needed.

[Team Wibble]

This is also an ISOLATED cache: http://coord.info/GCG4W5

At one point it had 3 containers. And some experienced cachers could not find it.
Never assume....

[Yurt]

I did replace one because there had been a string of DNFs and the CO said they'd replace it. This one was absolutely certain to have been missing as there was a spoiler photo of the only spot it could have been. I had a container in the bag and replaced it. The CO had noted on there that they couldn't get there to check for months but I sent them photos to confirm afterwards and they said it was certainly gone. That's about it.

No one has ever reported a second cache there although I know of a few others where a second does exist - the CO has replaced as they couldn't find it!

[gmj3191]

Just returning to caching after an extended absence and was browsing through some old logs when I noticed some derogative comments when I replaced a cache that had gone missing? The cache was in an isolated location at the end of Yorke Peninsular with incredible views which definitely justified a cache. The previous finder (A very seasoned cacher) failed to find the cache in the obvious spot and after an extensive search myself I also failed to find it! Instead of just placing a dnf log and leading other cachers on a goose chase I replaced the cache with one I had made up in the car. I logged the cache as a find on .com as well as a note saying:

"As with firesafe couldn't find it even though gz was very obvious!! It had all the small rocks pulled out and placed on the nearby shrub. I had a cache made up in the car for placement else where so I replaced the cache as this was one spot that definetly needed saving!! If the original does turn up please delete my log!"

I'm sure the other cachers (barring two) who found my replacement cache were happy with what I did and I had no objections from the cache owner either! Guess you can't please everyone

You have a good heart, and yes, you can't please everyone.

[POLKYS QUEST]

yes wibble's I agree It does have the potential to add extra cache containers to a cache location and add confusion! I myself have found two containers at one cache site on at least 5 cache locations I have visited! The same thing could occur if someone found a logbook or lid and placed it in a new container not realising the existing container is intact minus the logbook or lid! I didn't intentionally do what some see as the wrong thing but just took offence at those who took the cheap "shots" in their logs!

[blossom*]

I did something similar once but I have DNFed too many caches now that others too have not found only to have some log turn up a bit later saying not too hard to find if you look from the right angle or the right elevation or the right....or whatever. But I think it's a bit crook if you try to do the right thing and people have a go at you. Never mind, just play the game the way you enjoy

[covert]

Depends did you only replace it so you can fill in another project 81 block ? You would not of been the first....

[belken]

It can neither be rude or offensive when trying to be a good samaratin.
You can be both when you critisize.

I know how to be both.

I notice the two loggers who critisized logged it as a find. Dodgy ethics indeed from both of them.

[POLKYS QUEST]

sorry what's a project 81 block???? Only did it to preserve a cache in a great but isolated location!