[Az-Geocaching] "Finding" caches

[Bob Renner]

To find or not to find, that is the question.

There are a few circumstances where you could log your own
cache as a find or where you could find a cache more than
once.  When a cache is moved (yours or anothers) and you 
have to re-find it, it's a find.  I took some friends to 
a cache I had previously found.  The container was moved 
to a completely different spot about 70 feet away and in 
a small hole in the rocks.  We had to re-find this cache.  
I logged it as a find.  At the time I thought it would not 
change my find number.  I thought the number was the number 
of caches with a find log, not the number of find logs 
themselves.  However, it was still a find.  Also, the Beat 
the Heat Happy Hour cache was a joint cache by CBX2 and 
myself.  They set up the location and gave me the 
coordinates and I entered the cache page.  I logged that 
as a find because that was the first time I was there and 
had to "find" the resturant.

My opinion is that the log itself should reflect what 
happened.  If you found the cache, then log it as a find.  
Perhaps Jeremy should change the way the find number is 
generated to only count the caches with finds and not the 
find logs.  However, this would complicate the situation 
where there is a moving cache which does have to be 
re-found whenever it's moved.

It all boils down to what you're looking at.  If you're 
looking at the logs themselves for the insight to what
the hunter was thinking when he visited the cache, then the
type of log should reflect what happened.  If you're just 
looking at the numbers and not reading all of the logs, 
then the numbers need to be modified to only count the 
caches and not the logs.  If geocaching.com didn't report
the find number, this topic wouldn't even exist.  ALL finds 
(your own or a re-find) would be logged as finds.

I tend to put a little more information into what I did 
and saw during the hike or drive, and what I thought about 
the location.  I also try to read all the logs of all the 
caches in Arizona.  It helps me decide which caches I want 
to visit next.  

I don't care that much about my numbers.  Sure it was nice 
to be number one.  But it just showed, to me at least, that 
geocaching was something that I enjoyed.  It was a way to 
show me new places I hadn't been to before. I enjoyed the 
challenge of finding something that someone left for me to 
find and in a location they thought was interesting.

The numbers should only reflect the interest a person has
in geocaching and should not be scrutinized for the exact
value of that number.  Someone with 1-5 finds is a neocacher 
and is just getting started.  Someone with 15-20 finds is an 
experienced cacher and obviously knows how to hunt.  Someone
with 50+ finds is a seasoned cacher who has passed the
novelty stage and definately enjoys the sport.  Someone with
100+ finds within a few months can't control himself and his
wife probably thinks he's obsessed ;)  But he's probably having
a great time.

As far as the stats pages on Snaptek's web page - keep them
there.  Some people enjoy seeing them and they will find some
way to calculate them.  However, I don't think we need to argue
over what is and what isn't a find.  If someone wants to 
inflate their numbers, there are numerous ways this can be 
done other than the two mentioned here.  I'm just trying to 
express what I did and pass on the information to the next
person looking for the cache.

Bob Renner
Seasoned geocacher