How to log burned up cache

[+BBStackerz]

I found a couple of caches yesterday that were destroyed by a controlled fire so I logged them in using the "needs maintenance" option. They don't show up on my list as found caches and they still appear as not found caches on the map. Should I have logged them in differently...how can I fix this little problem. I did a search on this forum and found nothing.

[+gatoller]

Log them as 'Found', then log the 'Needs Maintenance'. I'm pretty sure you can do it in either order, so at this point you could go back and create 'Found' logs to get your count right.

[+BlueDeuce]

Did you sign the logbook? Personally I don't log destroyed caches as found but then again people have been known to call me a puritan. I'd wait until it's replaced and go back and sign the logbook, then claim it as found.

Edited March 19, 2010 by BlueDeuce

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

We agree with BD. Others will not.

 

We adhere to one of the first things we read on the geocaching.com website: Sign the logbook, then log your find online.

 

If the logbook is burned up, it cannot be signed, right? No signed logbook=no find.

 

The NM log would suffice. Once the cache is replaced with a logbook, we would return.

 

But then, we aren't "number runners", either.

[hoosier guy]

I can honestly say that circumstance has never occured to me. To me you found the caches you get the smilely. I'd just note the special little problem there.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

I can honestly say that circumstance has never occured to me. To me you found the caches you get the smilely. I'd just note the special little problem there.

Technically, remnants of a cache was found. Much like finding only a lid. Guidelines call for a logbook in a traditional cache. If no logbook, no cache.

 

We do understand the other side of the argument, just don't agree with it.

[+Brooklyn51]

I can honestly say that circumstance has never occured to me. To me you found the caches you get the smilely. I'd just note the special little problem there.

 

My 2 cents.. I agree with hoosier guy. You found the cache or at least where it was hidden as it was intended by the owner, so you should be able to collect the smiley. The loss of the log is a technical issue which you addressed with the needs maintenance note. Not that it necessarily applies in this specific instance, but faced with a lost, destroyed or otherwise unusable log in a found cache, one can always leave a new temporary log behind in the cache in question. Of course in this case, you would have had to leave a new cache too. So, I vote 'Yes". Log a find and collect your smiley

Edited March 19, 2010 by Brooklyn51

[+StarBrand]

No logbook - no smilie - for me anyway.

 

....and - yup the NM log type is not the same as a "found" log type. You have to do both.

[+BlueDeuce]

I can honestly say that circumstance has never occured to me. To me you found the caches you get the smilely. I'd just note the special little problem there.

 

My 2 cents.. I agree with hoosier guy. You found the cache or at least where it was hidden as it was intended by the owner, so you should be able to collect the smiley. The loss of the log is a technical issue which you addressed with the needs maintenance note. Not that it necessarily applies in this specific instance, but faced with a lost, destroyed or otherwise unusable log in a found cache, one can always leave a new temporary log behind in the cache in question. Of course in this case, you would have had to leave a new cache too. So, I vote 'Yes". Log a find and collect your smiley

 

Not even sure if this topic drift is even an issue for the OP but keep in mind that if you are not signing logbooks but still claiming a Found it, the Cache owner might delete your log. Even if you think it's a find.

 

 

edit: typo

Edited March 19, 2010 by BlueDeuce

[+fishgeek]

I agree with hoosier guy. The purpose of this whole endeavor is to FIND THE CACHE. Signing the log is simply a means of verifying that you found it and could hold it in your hands. If there is no log or it is unsignable, the bottom line is that you still found the cache. (Assuming that you found enough of the container to verify that it actually was the cache.)

 

Or you could just sign a scrap of paper and stuff it in the burnt-out carcass of the container.

 

I can honestly say that circumstance has never occured to me. To me you found the caches you get the smilely. I'd just note the special little problem there.

[hoosier guy]

I can honestly say that circumstance has never occured to me. To me you found the caches you get the smilely. I'd just note the special little problem there.

Technically, remnants of a cache was found. Much like finding only a lid. Guidelines call for a logbook in a traditional cache. If no logbook, no cache.

 

We do understand the other side of the argument, just don't agree with it.

 

Yeah, I do see your point too. That is in the guidelines.

[+PokerLuck]

To me, the find is the cache. If I find a cache or a remnant of one, I log it as a found, regardless of whether it has a signable log.

 

If there's no log, it's not a cache. If the log isn't replaced very quickly, it should be archived.

[majormajor42]

This is why I carry spare notepads (logs) in my cache pack, along with zip lock bags and things, so I can perform maintenance. If I came across a cache with a log that was so full that I couldn't find room, I would take the spare log out of my pack and place it in the cache. I would sign it too. I would then claim a smiley, and maybe log a performed maintenance or at least say what I did in my "found cache" log.

 

is this case any different? I would certainly advise the OP to carry a couple 'dollar store' log books in the future just in case this happens again. In addition, if the caches are easily accessible, go back and do the owner the favor of depositing new log books in these burnt caches.

[+BlueDeuce]

This is why I carry spare notepads (logs) in my cache pack, along with zip lock bags and things, so I can perform maintenance. If I came across a cache with a log that was so full that I couldn't find room, I would take the spare log out of my pack and place it in the cache. I would sign it too. I would then claim a smiley, and maybe log a performed maintenance or at least say what I did in my "found cache" log.

 

is this case any different? I would certainly advise the OP to carry a couple 'dollar store' log books in the future just in case this happens again. In addition, if the caches are easily accessible, go back and do the owner the favor of depositing new log books in these burnt caches.

 

I guess it would depend on the quality of the container, if it's damaged so much that you can't even close the thing you might just let the cache owner do their maintenance.

[+KoosKoos]

I found a couple of caches yesterday that were destroyed by a controlled fire so I logged them in using the "needs maintenance" option. They don't show up on my list as found caches and they still appear as not found caches on the map. Should I have logged them in differently...how can I fix this little problem. I did a search on this forum and found nothing.

 

I'm not sure what "destroyed by a controlled fire" means. If the container was destroyed, how do you know it was a cache to find?

 

If I found a broken container, I might drop a scrap of paper into it to show my log and count it as a find. But if it was just a melted glob that I couldn't positively identify as the cache, I'd probably just leave it as a NM and skip the find until next time.

 

I pretty much agree with the no signature in a logbook, I don't count it as a find, but then again, I don't really care how other people count their finds either.

[+Chrysalides]

keep in mind that if you are not signing logbooks but still claiming a Found it, the Cache owner might delete your log. Even if you think it's a find.

Unlike the horror stories told here every now and then, most cache owners won't begrudge you a smiley if you've found a destroyed cache. Go ahead and log if that's what you want to do, but if it gets deleted, shrug and move on.

 

I'd take a photo of the cache remnants and email it to the CO so that they know about the issue and can perform maintenance on it.

[+Anno Lynke]

I found a couple of caches yesterday that were destroyed by a controlled fire so I logged them in using the "needs maintenance" option. They don't show up on my list as found caches and they still appear as not found caches on the map. Should I have logged them in differently...how can I fix this little problem. I did a search on this forum and found nothing.

 

First are you sure they were destroyed, or are you assuming they were destroyed?

Depending on placement or if the cach was an ammo box, it could have survived a control burn.

If you found a melted pile of plastic and you could tell it was a cach, I would log it as a find.

 

I have found nanos with full log books and still log them as a find even though I couldnt sign

[GermanSailor]

If you found the geocache you log "found it".

If you think or know that it needs maintenance you log "needs maintenance".

 

An NM log doesn't include a found it.

 

The same thing happend to me, when I still lived in the USA.

 

Geocache

 

Read my log, dating 08th October 2006

 

GermanSailor

[+tozainamboku]

Kind of sad that question in getting started on why Needs Maintenance doesn't increment your find count has been hijacked into a discussion of whether it is even OK to log a find if you find the remains of a cache that was destroyed in a fire.

 

Needs Maintenance is separate from findind a cache. You need to log a Found It for your find count to increment. Sometimes you might revisit a cache (perhaps to leave a trackable item). You don't want to log it as find again but it may still need maintenance. You might also be a 'puritan' who won't log a Found It online unless they have signed the log. In that case you could still log a needs maintenance if you found a cache in some condition where signing the log is impossible.

[+Chrysalides]

Kind of sad that question in getting started on why Needs Maintenance doesn't increment your find count has been hijacked into a discussion of whether it is even OK to log a find if you find the remains of a cache that was destroyed in a fire.

Probably because:

 

1. It was answered in post #2

 

2. The OP included "I want my smiley" in the title.

 

I think it is a natural progression. Answer how to get the smiley, then discuss whether it is appropriate to get the smiley. Kind of sad that someone would find a thread with little animosity despite differences in opinion kind of sad

[+BlueDeuce]

Called it. Pay up.

[+tozainamboku]

Called it. Pay up.

Actually I put 'puritan' in quotes because I don't usually use it this way (and I always have to wind up apologizing if I do). Let me correct this.

 

Some cachers make a personal choice to not log a cache unless they have signed the physical log. They can still log a Needs Maintenance however.

 

I need to refrain from using puritan in the Getting Started forum. It is a term I use to describe people who insist that others are not playing the game the right way. It is acceptable to tell newbies how you personally choose to play, just not to say "you're playing wrong". In hindsight, the topic drift was not as bad as I may have made it out to be. Most people are simply giving their input whether or not they would have logged these caches as found, rather than telling the OP that he can't log them.

[+BBStackerz]

I'm the OP so here is what I did. I found three caches that were involved in a controlled fire. A controlled fire is when the people responsible for the property decide that the undergrowth is too thick, so they intentionally set it ablaze.

 

The first cache was an ammo box. The lid gasket, and everything inside made of plastic was melted. The log book was OK since it wasn't in a baggie so I signed it. I closed the lid and hung it from a branch so it would be off the ground. I took a picture of it and posted it when I logged it in as a "Needs Maintenance". I thought it was a sight to see acres of blackened ash and a black box sitting there trying to hide.

 

The second cache was a homemade "Mushroom". It was right where it was supposed to be, but all that was left of the toadstool was the top cap. The PVC stem, and the logbook, was melted into a gooey mass. I took a picture of it and left it as it was.

 

The third cache was a cammo'd plastic jar. It again was right where it was supposed to be. All that was left was a handfull of marbles and a gooey mass. I took a picture and left it as it was.

 

I dragged my butt through a couple of acres of burnt out forrest to find these and by golly I want my smilies for my efforts. So I logged them as found, and I have pictures to prove it.

[+J the Goat]

Should we stay away from mentioning that if the control burn was done by the property owner, then these 3 caches might just be on private land?

 

Alright, just my pair of pennies; signed means found. If the owner decides to archive these caches and verifies your finds, then maybe a found log would be alright, but I would say not until then. Congrats on finding plastic cache containers after a fire though, strong work.

[+BBStackerz]

They were on state property. I didn't find much of the plastic container, but the cats eys gave it away.

[+uxorious]

I'm the OP so here is what I did. I found three caches that were involved in a controlled fire. A controlled fire is when the people responsible for the property decide that the undergrowth is too thick, so they intentionally set it ablaze.

 

The first cache was an ammo box. The lid gasket, and everything inside made of plastic was melted. The log book was OK since it wasn't in a baggie so I signed it. I closed the lid and hung it from a branch so it would be off the ground. I took a picture of it and posted it when I logged it in as a "Needs Maintenance". I thought it was a sight to see acres of blackened ash and a black box sitting there trying to hide.

 

The second cache was a homemade "Mushroom". It was right where it was supposed to be, but all that was left of the toadstool was the top cap. The PVC stem, and the logbook, was melted into a gooey mass. I took a picture of it and left it as it was.

 

The third cache was a cammo'd plastic jar. It again was right where it was supposed to be. All that was left was a handfull of marbles and a gooey mass. I took a picture and left it as it was.

 

I dragged my butt through a couple of acres of burnt out forrest to find these and by golly I want my smilies for my efforts. So I logged them as found, and I have pictures to prove it.

 

Sounds like just about how I would have done it too.

Then I would not let how others play the game bother me. The way you play it may be different, but that doesn't mean you are wrong or right.

[Wallydraigle]

I'm the OP so here is what I did. I found three caches that were involved in a controlled fire. A controlled fire is when the people responsible for the property decide that the undergrowth is too thick, so they intentionally set it ablaze.

 

The first cache was an ammo box. The lid gasket, and everything inside made of plastic was melted. The log book was OK since it wasn't in a baggie so I signed it. I closed the lid and hung it from a branch so it would be off the ground. I took a picture of it and posted it when I logged it in as a "Needs Maintenance". I thought it was a sight to see acres of blackened ash and a black box sitting there trying to hide.

 

The second cache was a homemade "Mushroom". It was right where it was supposed to be, but all that was left of the toadstool was the top cap. The PVC stem, and the logbook, was melted into a gooey mass. I took a picture of it and left it as it was.

 

The third cache was a cammo'd plastic jar. It again was right where it was supposed to be. All that was left was a handfull of marbles and a gooey mass. I took a picture and left it as it was.

 

I dragged my butt through a couple of acres of burnt out forrest to find these and by golly I want my smilies for my efforts. So I logged them as found, and I have pictures to prove it.

 

Yeah, I'd have logged those as found. If I've located the cache, took a photo of the cache, and am holding it in my hands, then I obviously have found it. I'm not responsible for the condition it's in because that's not my doing. If the CO wanted to hassle me about logging a find in that case, then I'd just know who's caches to ignore from now on, that's all.

[+Harry Dolphin]

My thoughts on the subject (as if anyone really cares):

If the cache has a log that is a soggy mass of pulp, I will add a piece of paper with my signature, and log the find. (Also includes the case where the container was in place, but muggles stole/retrieved all of the contents. And the one that was attacked by mice. Everything, including the log was strewn across the forest floor.)

If the cache has been destroyed (for instance, the match container shredded by the lawnmower), then I do not log a find. There is no place for me to put the log/substitute log. (In this instance, the log was also shredded.)

I would log a find on the ammo can. I would not log a find (but would log Needs Maintenance) on the melted plastic preform, and the melted plastic bottle. Because the is no cache, and no place to put the log!

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Well put, HD.

 

Somehow, I did not think of an ammo can (how could that be?). I thought only of the ubiquitous plastic containers.

 

I concede adding a log to the ammo can, and stand by the others as "not existing".

 

EDIT: as far as "wanting my smiley", well... however you wish to run your "race".

Personally, I think you did a great justice to geocaching by hunting and alerting the CO to what happened. Oh-so-many do not bother. Just claim and walk.

Edited March 19, 2010 by Gitchee-Gummee

[+BlueDeuce]

Yep, I appreciate you reporting to the CO as well.

[+Taoiseach]

\If the logbook is burned up, it cannot be signed, right? No signed logbook=no find.

 

Use the ashes of the burnt log to sign the container. That's what I'd do

 

[+WRASTRO]

My thoughts on the subject (as if anyone really cares):

If the cache has a log that is a soggy mass of pulp, I will add a piece of paper with my signature, and log the find. (Also includes the case where the container was in place, but muggles stole/retrieved all of the contents. And the one that was attacked by mice. Everything, including the log was strewn across the forest floor.)

If the cache has been destroyed (for instance, the match container shredded by the lawnmower), then I do not log a find. There is no place for me to put the log/substitute log. (In this instance, the log was also shredded.)

I would log a find on the ammo can. I would not log a find (but would log Needs Maintenance) on the melted plastic preform, and the melted plastic bottle. Because the is no cache, and no place to put the log!

+1

 

And I applaud the OP reporting the needs maintenance.

[+popokiiti]

As a photo was taken in each instance showing that the OP found the caches, although was only able to sign the log for one, I would say grab your smilies AND post the NM log...and pics! What the cache owner chooses to do afterwards is up to him/her/them...you could always shoot them a message and ask if they are OK with you logging as found.

[+wolfslady]

Wow some of you are tough. It would never have ocurred to me that there was anything wrong with logging caches that you found but couldn't log for one reason or another. I guess I'll have to read the rules better, but I thought the reason for the logs was just to make sure you found the cache and weren't claiming caches that you never visited. I'm new and it didn't even occur to me that I should carry some paper just in case a cache was missing the log or too wet to sign. I started doing that after I found one that was too we and another was so full I had to settle for a few letters along the well covered side. But the very wet one couldn't hold a paper anyway. I guess I could have left a tiny peice that would have become trash when the next person went to try and sign their find. It seems to me a picture should be proof enough that they found the cache to earn the smiley. Even more so when they let the owners know that the caches were damaged. How many people never log a DNF or NM because they don't want to look bad or they are too lazy. How many people drop a bug or coin and forget to log a find? I'm sure it happens. Should they loose their smiley? I guess the best thing to do is to tell the owner what happened and ask if it's OK for you to mark it as found, but the owner who has pictures in hand and says no is not one who's caches I would want to visit even if it wasn't my find. It's things like this that may turn some new cachers off. Just my opinion. I've got to go read the rules again to see if there is anything else I missed. Can someone point me to this one.

[+Q10]

I found a couple of caches yesterday that were destroyed by a controlled fire so I logged them in using the "needs maintenance" option. They don't show up on my list as found caches and they still appear as not found caches on the map. Should I have logged them in differently...how can I fix this little problem. I did a search on this forum and found nothing.

 

I would definately log them as found (and of course also log a need maintenance - the order to log doesn't matter). And if I was the owner of the cache, I would certainly allow you to log the caches as found.

[+briansnat]

The sport is called geocaching, not geologging. I think that if you found enough of the cache to be absolutely certain that you found the cache then why not log the find? You found it. The point of the log is to verify that you were there. Your photo of the cache remains does the same.

 

What does absolutely certain mean? To me a plastic lid, velcro on a bench, empty container, a few trinkets scattered around, a melted mass of plastic, a hook, or screw hole in a board would not make the cut.

 

A lid or empty container with the words geocache written on it, a container destroyed by a lawn mower with shards of plastic, the logbook, and cache contents, a container with a logbook so wet that it has become a mass of pulp all would make the cut.

 

As you see, there are a variety of thoughts on this. I recall one cache that the owner had screwed to a board. The cache was gone and people where logging finds based on the screw holes. To me that is taking the concept of a "find" too far. For others it is perfectly logical.

 

In the end what constitutes a find is between you and the cache owner. If your photographs of the melted containers is good enough for cache owner and you are comfortable with logging it as a find then go for it. Though if you stretch things too far you might find your log posted here.

[+BlueDeuce]

In the end what constitutes a find is between you and the cache owner.

 

Pretty much. My personal preference is to log only viable caches. There is a certain amount of pride in making twice the amount of effort to log a working cache, even if nobody else is. I don't wonder if I am 'close enough' to call it geocaching. I don't explain my geocaching by saying '...and that's why I decided to claim it as a Found.' Nobody says to me 'be prepared to have your log deleted'. I find the cache and I sign the log and when I can't find the cache and sign the log, I wait until I can. I am a Purist.

 

Edit: clarification.

Edited March 20, 2010 by BlueDeuce

[+NeecesandNephews]

To me, the find is the cache. If I find a cache or a remnant of one, I log it as a found, regardless of whether it has a signable log.

 

If there's no log, it's not a cache. If the log isn't replaced very quickly, it should be archived.

 

 

This post confused me. Perhaps you could clarify it.

 

Just for the record I am in the "puritan" camp. (and it does not offend me for you to call me that).

 

I will take the words of the poster I quoted, and say I totally agree. To meet the definition of a "cache" it must have a log book. If you found an ammo can without a logbook, you found an ammo can. Not a cache. So how can you log a "I found the cache" when it isn't one??

 

I am not going to join the debate on logging in the cache logbook before you log online. I have made my opinion known in many posts.

 

What amazes me is not whether you found the cache, or the charred remnants of the cache, or a cache scattered around, its the utter desperation people seem to demonstrate for that one smiley.

 

I know all the excuses for this behavior from, "well I found it", to "if I don't log it it appears on my unfound list" ect. Like any of these things signals the end of days! Its just one smiley!

 

In the instance described by the OP, I would log a NM, wait for the repairs/replacement to be made. Then return and pick up where you were in your search. If that one smiley is that important, its not going to hurt to wait on it.

 

I will say I agree with others... it is going to be up to the cache owner, if you do log it, as to whether or not he lets the "found it" stand. (and it makes no matter to me what you decide to do, its your choice and I am not telling you how to make it)

[+BBStackerz]

I will say I agree with others... it is going to be up to the cache owner, if you do log it, as to whether or not he lets the "found it" stand.

 

If thats the case, everyone who ever signed the logbook before the cache was destroyed, gets rejected because no one can now "prove" they signed the log.

[+NeecesandNephews]

I will say I agree with others... it is going to be up to the cache owner, if you do log it, as to whether or not he lets the "found it" stand.

 

If thats the case, everyone who ever signed the logbook before the cache was destroyed, gets rejected because no one can now "prove" they signed the log.

 

 

Without starting an off-topic debate... The Guidelines are clear on CO's and their responsibilities pertaining to online logs, cache maintenance, and so on. You can list "what-ifs" from now on if you like, and the thread could go on for days.

 

If the CO chooses to challenge every "Found" online log, it is within his/her rights to delete them if the corresponding name doesn't appear on the cache log. I would think such a person was a jerk, and would probably place all his/her caches on my ignore list, but s/he still has that right.

 

The "what-if" that comes into play is whether or not s/he chooses to do this. I doubt s/he would but stranger things have happened. The CO in question in the OP would probably be happy to let you log finds, and appreciate you notifying them the cache was destroyed. But I am just speculating on that.

 

I didn't write the Guidelines. If anyone has a problem with the CO's actions, I will suggest what everyone has suggested for years, contact@geocaching.com.

 

edit to add- I was not trying to be contentious, just pointing out the possibilities,and repeating what had been posted already, in the quote you posted.

Edited March 20, 2010 by NeecesandNephews

[+Colonial Cats]

Did you sign the logbook? Personally I don't log destroyed caches as found but then again people have been known to call me a puritan. I'd wait until it's replaced and go back and sign the logbook, then claim it as found.

Here is a stutue of BlueDeuce-

 

[+BlueDeuce]

Why is everybody always picking on me?

 

[+WRASTRO]

Why is everybody always picking on me?

 

Poor BD. I don't pick on you. I almost always agree with you. But that was a pretty stylin' outfit that CC posted.

[+RobDJr]

If I know what I found is beyond all doubt the cache, I'll take a pic and log a find and NM, and send the pic to the CO as proof of find.

 

If I have doubt that what I see is the cache or it can't be clearly identified, I log a DNF and NM, and again send a pic to the CO.

 

The few times I've logged a DNF/NM for a destroyed cache, I've gotten a response from the CO telling me it was the cache and to go ahead and log a find on the cache and thanking me for the way I handled it.

 

Usually a little bit of patience, politeness, and communication goes a long way.

[+kh54s10]

I have had a couple where I could not sign the log. One was mush and one I could not open the cache without damaging it so I logged Found It with a note explaining the problem. If the CO deletes it I will return and do it again. I would not log something as a find if I did not touch the cache. I have seen some log a find when they are sure they found where it should have been... Sure!!!!

[+Team GeoBlast]

I found a couple of caches yesterday that were destroyed by a controlled fire so I logged them in using the "needs maintenance" option. They don't show up on my list as found caches and they still appear as not found caches on the map. Should I have logged them in differently...how can I fix this little problem. I did a search on this forum and found nothing.

 

This is one of the cool things about Geocaching. There are basic rules to follow, but you decide how you want to play the game. One of the early decisions you make is what the smiley means to you. Do you want a lot of them? Then there are several ways to accomplish that and you can adjust your standards and caching habits accordingly. Do you want to remember each smiley and the adventure that brought you to log it? Then you can adjust your standards accordingly.

 

There are only opinions outside of the guidelines posted on the website. Take what you read here for what it is worth. It is on you to play the game how you want to.

[+5he5she5]

I am wondering about travelers that may never get back to the area again. I would like to be able to log something if I tried to find a cache and it was destroyed. Any thoughts on that ?

Edited March 21, 2010 by 5he5she5

[+NeecesandNephews]

I am wondering about travelers that may never get back to the area again. I would like to be able to log something if I tried to find a cache and it was destroyed. Any thoughts on that ?

edit- decided against posting my thoughts. Sorry about that.

Edited March 21, 2010 by NeecesandNephews

[+Ladybug Kids]

For Taiga Cascade, a group of cachers and I found the scorched ammo can and replaced it.

We did the same for Granite Tors.

In both cases, previous logs alerted us to the condition of the cache and we corresponded with the cache owner about container replacement before we headed out.

 

Had we been surprised by the condition of either cache, we are usually equipped to do log book replacements on the fly and would have signed a new log, left it in the container we found, and logged both a "found it" and a "needs maintenance." If we hadn't found a container, the log would have been a "DNF."

Edited March 21, 2010 by Ladybug Kids

[+briansnat]

I am wondering about travelers that may never get back to the area again. I would like to be able to log something if I tried to find a cache and it was destroyed. Any thoughts on that ?

 

I don't think the fact that you will never be back has any bearing on what log type you use. You should use the same log type you would have used if the cache was in the park across the street from your house.

Edited March 22, 2010 by briansnat