Green Toad

My main concern is attempting to make corrections to specific parts of the datasheet without becoming too verbose by explaining that I did not confirm everything contained therein. Also, I know that every profession has its own 'lingo' which mean different things to that profession than what the same words would mean to the general public. The last thing I would want to do is submit an update that unintentionally used a word or phrase that had significantly different meaning than from the one that I meant. This is the basis for my question re: 'found' vs. 'found as described'. I know that surveyors are very precise in what they do, and, therefore, the meanings of words that they use. I just want to make sure that when I do make a submission to the NGS that I don't give the illusion of more precision than actually existed. -stroh

I have several questions about reporting benchmarks to the NGS. I am asking here because I believe the answer will be worth including in the FAQ. Just in case it is not clear, these questions are in refernce to reporting finds to the NGS. 1. I found JK1248 (Pike's Peak) back in 2003. It was last recovered in 1986. Since I did not know about reporting to the NGS, nor the reporting guidelines. The only information that I could provide is that I found the mark and its 2 reference marks, as far as I can tell I am the only person on GC.com that has found all three marks. Unfortunately, at the time, I did not make any references of each marks realationship to each other. So, would it be acceptable to report the mark as "Found" (in this case, Good Condition) and include the WGS-84 coordinates for each? I feel uncomfortable reporting "Found as Described" since I cannot confirm the relational information in the data sheet. 2. I recently found KY0380 (Oakdale 2) and KY3598 (Oakdale RM1 Reset). The information in these data sheets are generally correct and anyone reading them should be able to find the marks. The only corrections would be in reference to a railroad that no longer exists (it is now a rail to trail) and KY3598 was refernced to be on the side of a bank and 1 foot south of the curb. The building is no longer used as a bank and the sidewalk is approximately 8 feet wide now, but the mark is still there. I did not have a tape measure with me to measure the exact distances. If I were to report these, how should I report the changes without explicitly confirming the other measurements? (i.e. "13 FEET EAST OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BUILDING, 25 FEET WEST OF BRICK PILLAR AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER ENTRANCE TO BANK") I have no doubt that this information is correct, especially considering that there is no evidence of a change in the entrance to the building. KY0380 also refers to a train station that no longer exists ("0.05 MILE NORTHWEST OF PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD STATION"). I am using this as a hypothetical, but I drive by this building every day, so I will go back and perform more accurate measurements. 3. When should 'Found as described' vs 'Found' be used? When using 'Found as described' should each piece of information in the datasheet be confirmed, including distances? Or can 'Found as described' be used when the datasheet is accurate enough to find the mark, but the distances were not confirmed. 4. If the 15 degree rule is violated, should GPS readings be considered useless? Or, could I 1) get a GPSr reading 75 feet north of the mark and state it as such, or 2) get a poor read at the site and state in my description tha the 15 degree rule was violated. My main concern is that I would like to report these marks with the proper corrections, but do not want to be seen as saying that the information that I did not correct is correct when I was unable to verify the correctness. I think this will most commonly happen in reference to distances, either inches, feet, or miles; since it is easy to determine if a road, building, or railroad still exist. -stroh

Please excuse me for resurrecting an old thread, I am working my way from the oldest to newest in this forum. If I understand correctly, there are vertical stations and there are horizontal stations. My question deals with this dichotomy, why are vertical and horizontal stations separate? Why don't the surveyors determine both dimensions accurately when placing a benchmark/monument/disk/etc.? It seems odd to me, to be accurate one way, but not the other. Am I missing something? Also, correct me if I'm wrong, because there are three dimensions. Is a vertical disc equivalent to elevation, while the horizontal is equivalent to latitude + longitude? -stroh

I thought about creating a new crossposted topic, but decided this was a better place (plus it doesn't create a new thread). Just a note to the USGS/NOAA folks out there that are earning their civil service points by helping us "hobbyists" out. I've noticed that smilies have ended up in important discussions where they weren't intended. If you uncheck the "Enable emoticons?" box before posting your messages, then you will not have smilies corrupting your posts. -stroh

I have a really old version of Mapsource, circa 1996-98 or thereabout. I'd like to update my software to something a little more current, but cannot afford the latest version. Does anyone know where I could buy an outdated or used version on the cheap? My GPSr is an eMap, so if there is other software that is compatible, I'd be interested in that too. -stroh

What are the dimensions?

Has there been any movement on this topic?

I would change that to "can" instead of "should" because it could be interpreted that the NGS is requiring a submission.

Here is an interesting article in the NYTimes about how the BM's that show the border between the US and Canada are getting lost due to lack of a budget.

I have one, its a hand me down from my father in law. I love it!! I had wanted to geocache for a while, but did not want to splurge on a GPSr. Once I got it, I loved it. It has been through thick and thin with me and I have found it to be very accurate. I carry a compass with me, so I don't need the compass feature. It definitely points me in the correct direction. -gt

The next obvious question (assuming it has not already been answered) is what is the oldest known BM? -gt

I must add my name to the list of condolences. My dog is 12 and I have no idea what I would do without him!

I have several comments to the many issues that have been brought up. 1) Here, in the north, it is very easy for a cache to become unavailable because of weather. If a creek or any water needs to be crossed, the cache may become unapproachable during the winter. If an owner marks that cache as unavailable, s/he is is acting ethically by insuring that no-one puts life or limb at risk for a find. 2) In the Pittsburgh area, Questmaster came up with the idea of the Lonliest Cache Challenge, where the three caches within a 50 mile area that have been without a visit for the longest time are placed on the challenge list (I hope I explained this well enough). Then the local geocachers are challenged/dared to go find these caches. The finders get their name on a virtual certificate for finding the cache. This would be an excellent way to drum up interest in 'out of the way' places in your area. 3) I will take this as a tongue in cheek response, but..... if there are caches out there that have not been found, then go find them! If they are temporarily inactive, then chances are that the owner took the effort to inactivate them for a reason (which is unlikely to be because they did not have time to check on the cache.) The cache owner may believe that the cache is no longer there, but if you cross it, then it is obviously there. Most caches that have not been checked up on are totally deactivated, not temporalily deactivated. Give the owner the benfit of the doubt. Many approvers are active in attempting to remove old caches that were not approved or have become dormant. Keystone Approver, in western PA, lists caches that should be removed and their coordinates in the Northeast Forum. I'm sure your approver does the same. 4) If you have a problem with a particular cache, let your local approver know your concerns. If the cache needs to be deactivated and removed, your approver will make sure that happens. -gt

As I'm not a pro (and only a interested observer at this point) the only time I would log anything with the NGS is if I was absolutely, positively sure the BM was destroyed or if the Bm had not been found in a very long time. Otherwise, I would place a found note on GC.com and let the professionals make a more accurate determination. .gt

Why not change that designation as 'Possibly Destroyed', which would count as a not found? Then those that are definite that the BM has been destroyed can use a designation of 'destroyed' or 'definitely destroyed', which would count as a find. This way there would be a separated be tween 'really hard to find' and 'not there'? -gt

Just indicate the issues and I'll work on them. I don't need praise and I do need to know what is wrong so I can fix it. There is no need to be overly colorful. In a thankess world, you deserve all of the praise that you get and more. The fact that you are updating the BM section is worthy of praise! You are making the redheaded stepchild of geocaching a full fledged member of the family! -gt

I'm not a BM hunter, but I am very interested in the sport and have attempted to follow it closely. I would appreciate those that are knowledeable in BMing to help out. Please see this post about creating a FAQ forum Post Prosing a FAQ Forum. I think this could help inform others about benchmarks and possibly help elevate it from its stepsister status. -gt

I appreciate that GC.com has a FAQ, but it is limited. There is quite a bit of info in the forums available to people who are willing to search for it, but we as a community, can get together and create faq's that can be placed in a special forum . Then through peer review and additions, these FAQs can become part of an official FAQ for geocaching. I am attempting to do this on my own right now, but I am still in the process of designing the site. I have bookmarked many threads that have valuable information, but the communnity is getting to the point where it needs a universal FAQ. When I complete my site, I want to create a forum where people can post their own FAQs to be added to the site. Obviously, GC.com is the correct location for this FAQ, we can do alot in the creation of the FAQ until GC.com decides to take it over. -gt

If you think your problems are bad, just think about the person who just passed the 1000 mark for TBs. -gt

There is already a way for one to post their own coordinates for the cache location in the "log a find" link. The problem lies where the searcher possibly did not find all of the clues. There is a cache that I know of where there were two clues hidden, although only one was needed to find the cache, where working with a single clue the cache was at least 85 feet off. I have not been able to ge back to find the second clue, so I do not know if it would have helped. I notified the owner, as well as the local approver, of my concerns about the cache. Since, there have been no changes I am willing to assume that the second clue would have helped. If you truly believe that the coordinates are truly off, first contact the owner, second contact the local approver, and third post your own coordinates. But, don't arbitrarily ruin the search for your fellow geocachers. Do what you think is correct, but also think about the above steps that I discussed before you do it. -gt

It's no big deal. All I'm doing is concatenating strings from what you entered in the form to create the URL. The actual button itself is done here on Groundspeak. I've got nuttin' to do with that... How is the button created at Groundspeak? This is news to me.

I'm not a Mac user, but this has got to be the stupidest move that I have seen by a software company that I have seen in a long time!

Ike also costs NZ$12,000. I don't know what the conversion is, but that's expensive!

If the original hider IS NOT using WAAS and the searcher IS using WAAS, will it really make a difference? The searcher is using a more accurate device to find something that was hidden with a less accurate device. Am I missing something here? -gt

Could you be ever so kind to explain how your script works? If you don't want to do it publicly, can you do it privately? I'm really impressed! -gt