first hide--not

Something else seemed fishey to me about this cache so I went to look at the logs.

A cacher named groove&co noted that when they first looked for it, it was called Folgers and that is the name that I found it under. Apparently the owner changed the name when they changed the write up.


BRDAD I think that you were there after the cache was gone and met the requirements of the cache as listed at the time.

Quote:

---

Lee is quite certain there was a cache there when we went, in a tree. She is looking through her notebooks now. I suppose I could have thought the cache was a virtual. But my online log still sounds suspicious. I will be changing my log to a note if I conclude we didn't find the cache.

---

When I found it, it was a coffee can in the rocks along the east shore. I think the picture by Team Darcins Digs shows the cache location well.

Container or no container, the beauty of this sport is that I got to visit that place. What a hidden jewel!!

I am happy as long as there is a cache there to share the spot.

Indeed this is the old "Folgers" cache and it seems they managed to make it into a virtual without too much trouble. This is my old log when I found it"

July 31, 2005 by Haffy (1063 found)
This is a tricky one to get to, not because it is hard to find but because it is hard to get to with all the muggles around today. Finally was able to be discreet enough to not be seen and got the cache. Took the TB and left my new Maine note. TFTC Haffy6

I see the Maine Publisher has asked to have it either archived or a real cache hidden in the spot, so this should bring some attention to it now.

So if I "found" Point when it wasn't there, can I find the "real" cache when it gets placed too?? I'm in Boothbay Harbor a lot and there are so few caches to find that I'll take anything I can get! :p

And I know of another virtual that has a real cache within 400' of it and both count as caches found. But I'm not telling where it is.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kayaking loon

So if I "found" Point when it wasn't there, can I find the "real" cache when it gets placed too?? I'm in Boothbay Harbor a lot and there are so few caches to find that I'll take anything I can get! :p

And I know of another virtual that has a real cache within 400' of it and both count as caches found. But I'm not telling where it is.....

---

Just curious, how can you find a cache if it isn't there? :confused: And yes you can find the next cache if it gets placed there I would think, because it will be a totally new cache.

we had found the place but no cache and with nothing to log we did not log it. it just didn't seem right. once an actual cache is there then we will go and sign the log book and then claim it as a find. it is a wonderful spot and we look forward to going back. so hopefully one is there soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Haffy

Just curious, how can you find a cache if it isn't there? :confused: And yes you can find the next cache if it gets placed there I would think, because it will be a totally new cache.

---

Well, I was a newbie then, what did I know? It seemed a lot like a virtual and they were allowed then. I just took my GPS and walked until I got to the exact coords, enjoyed the view and logged it. A lot of people were logging it so I just assumed, in my "newbieness" (do you like that word?)that it was OK. I think the cache at Ocean Point is the same. It washed away and people (including me) still found it and logged it and probably still are. And that is a problem with putting a cache "above high tide". Some high tides, driven by storms and wind, are REALLY high.

That said, I'd love to see more caches in Boothbay Harbor. I remember saying once that if I still lived there, I'd have the place covered in caches. Now if I could just remember where I was going to put them I could offer some suggestions. I placed one, after much thought. I first tried to make it a virtual, discovered they were no longer allowed, and wrestled with the high tide problem before I went much higher with it. :)

We like virtuals . . . and this seemed like a good place for one. We just felt a bit odd logging a traditional cache when there wasn't a cache container any more and there weren't any questions to answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hide_from_the_kids

We like virtuals . . . and this seemed like a good place for one. We just felt a bit odd logging a traditional cache when there wasn't a cache container any more and there weren't any questions to answer.

---

Well, Ocean Point Rocks is the same. The cache disappeared in 2002 and everyone has been happily logging it since. So maybe Itlindian can have that spot too. If "Point" is being challenged, "Ocean Point Rocks" should be too. But both caches have taken people to beautiful spots, that they might not have seen otherwise, and provided much entertainment. You can compare that to a litter covered area, with a GRC film canister and a soggy log and which one is the winner? :eek: I guess I'd take the "almost a virtual" in a beautiful spot. But neither meets the "true" spirit of a great cache. All that said, let's remember once again, that it's just a game.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kayaking loon

Well, Ocean Point Rocks is the same. The cache disappeared in 2002 and everyone has been happily logging it since. So maybe Itlindian can have that spot too. If "Point" is being challenged, "Ocean Point Rocks" should be too. But both caches have taken people to beautiful spots, that they might not have seen otherwise, and provided much entertainment. You can compare that to a litter covered area, with a GRC film canister and a soggy log and which one is the winner? :eek: I guess I'd take the "almost a virtual" in a beautiful spot. But neither meets the "true" spirit of a great cache. All that said, let's remember once again, that it's just a game.....

---

The BIG difference with ocean point rocks is that it was officially changed to a virtual cache and bears the icon. The unfortunate part is, it was changed back when a cache owner could change the type themselves, without any approval from gc.com, so it was allowed without having to prove you were there.

But, nonetheless, it is a true virtual, which Point is not.

If the true reward is a great spot, then if you didn't really find the cache a note should be as worthy as a found it.

But, it's a just a game - the validity of a find should be between the 'finder' and the cache hider. But at the same time, how we act determines how others see us as a group.



Off Topic, regarding hide_from_the_kids avatar: cute pic, I have a niece that loves those stretchy things!