Is it me ?

[Predictable Bob]

:confused:

Over the weekend I collected around 10 caches locally (Still without a GPS!) but three of them had the same problem - DAMP !

Two were 35mm film containers and the other was a 40-50mm long tube that looked purpose made for geocaching. Is damp a common problem and if so why don't people put the logs in plastic bags ?

:dunno:

[Bear and Ragged]

:confused:
Is damp a common problem and if so why don't people put the logs in plastic bags ?

:dunno:
Damp common?
Yes.

Plastic bags?
If the container leaks anyway, the bag ain't gonna help matters. The log will still get damp.
(There's a quote from a cacher in the US side of the GS forums: "If you have to use a baggie to keep the log dry, the containers already failed!")

Often it's down to finders not closing lids correctly, and/or signing logs in the rain...

(Once upon a time film tubs were watertight. The new modern ones are not!)

[Fermentum]

I got a cache over the week end and the log was damp. So damp the biro pen wouldn't work. Luckily I have a small biro on me so I managed to leave that.

The ice cream tubs are the worst of all, I pulled a lid off one of them once and it was full to the brim with dirty water.

As B&R said, the container is the most important thing of all

[The Hornet]

I wonder whether our review team should consider refusing to publish obviously inadequate containers? I remember when I was reviewing, when I came across something like an ice cream tub or takeaway container I would "strongly suggest" to the owner that their cache was unlikely to fulfill the minimum 3 month life requirement, and asking them to use something more suitable.

I realise many (most?) cache descriptions probably don't describe the container but if it does say that it's a 35mm film pot or an ice cream tub or similar then there perhaps should be a reluctance to publish.

And before a bandwagon starts rolling, it's the actual container I'm criticising NOT whether or not it's a micro!!

[Graculus]

If it's obvious the container is a poor choice - the owner says what it is in the description or reviewer note when they submit it - then we'd query it. Ice cream tubs and take away boxes being examples of poor choices. I recently asked an owner to change the container from the plastic module thingy inside a Kinder Egg to something more suitable. But most of the time we never know what the container is, it's usually described just as 'small, so bring your own pen'.

The Knowledge Books (http://support.groundspeak.com//index.php?pg=kb.page&id=75) page on containers has recently been updated with pictures as well and makes it pretty clear what is or isn't a good container. Of course to go to a supermarket and by a few food storage boxes that would be ideal requires a bit of effort.... much easier to use that old chinese takeaway box from last nights dinner... just make sure it's not washed out thoroughly so the animals will find it.... :wacko:

Owners should respond to any logs reporting a problem..... but many don't and I spend happy hours going through 'needs archived' logs and then a couple of weeks later just archiving the caches.

Chris
Graculus
Volunteer UK Reviewer for geocaching.com
UK Geocaching Information & Resources website www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk (http://www.follow-the-arrow.co.uk)
Geocaching.com Knowledge Books (http://support.groundspeak.com//index.php)

[DrDick&Vick]

I think that much of the problem stems from the fact taht so many want to place a cache but want to do it on the cheap.
I think Graculus has got it right where he states that a trip to the shops to buy a sutable container is a little to much like hard work.
I remember a cache in Cornwall last year that was a plastic take a way container that had been gidden underneath a large stone and was badly cracked by the time the third finder uncovered it.
Visit your local £ shop and buy some cheap lok lok type containers.