Spoo

On Jan 1, 2004, I began to hunt geocahes......I racked up about 20 by the end of March and then suddenly discovered BM hunting. In calander year 2005 I have only picked up one geocache and that was because it was convienently along the way to a mountain top Tri-station. My count on BM's is now well over 200 with still less then 30 geocaches. And yes, I report to NGS. BM's are much more exciting. You can still get the 'pot at the end of the rainbow' feeling while hiking and the math, geography, geology, history and research needed for BM hunting adds much more to the adventure. Anyone that geocaches ONLY, or BM hunts but does not report to NGS, is OK in my book. You are enjoying yourself, you are out in the world instead of just being a couch potato, most geocachers practice CITO and it takes a lot of sick people off the streets and puts them in the woods where they belong. THAT LAST LINE WAS A JOKE FOLKS !!!!!!!!! I just happen to have a passion for the small metal disks found all over the country.

I noticed that my logs (I'm in Maine) from October have not been posted on the NGS site also. I was giving them (NGS) some extra time in case they are behind. I figured I could always repost if needed, but I am glad to see someone else has noticed this issue. (Crap......there go my October stats !)

I just returned from the Persian Gulf, working for Uncle Sam aboard an [undisclosed] Naval ship. While at sea, I really do not know where I was, but using an oil company map of coastal refineries, the ships repeating compass, and several nights of observations, I was able to deduce my location based on the shore refinery gas blow off flames. This picture was taken at about 20 miles off the shore of Iran. After several nights of observations, I was able to read these flames and their patterns, as compared to the map, almost as if they were printed in English. Benchmarks are what you make them.

I guess we all look for marks and do so for 'FUN' in our own way. 2oldfarts think nothing of driving 1 or 200 miles looking for marks in their beautiful desert area. ArtMan can pick up 30 in a day (Congrats by the way!) and 25 of them will be FTF. I spend an entire day climbing a mountain in hopes of finding one long lost mark. We all had fun in our own way. If someone wants to log a dis-mounted mark as FUN......so be it. It isn't my cup of Tea. I know who has earned their numbers when I look at holographs site and spot check the logs.

BDT.....my apologies. Bad choice of words on my part. I really did understand that you were giving an exagerated example for my benefit and NOT citing an actual survey. I think my point of relativity still sticks. NO SURVEYOR has been wrong with his published results, it simply is a matter of where one is measuring from.

OK.....just to irratate every one once more...... If the above example by BDT is accurate, that is, if a 100 point survey leads to a 3 foot error, and if that error is repeatable, then the accuracy CANNOT be +/- 7 decimal places. I am sorry......I have tried to explain that 7 decimal places to the right of an inch is virtually IMPOSSIBLE in the world of machining. I just find myself in disbelief that 7 decimal places to the right of a FOOT can be held on the face of this planet. Other evidence and spokes people here have indicated that a measurement to a single location from several different points would give different relationships and numbers. I can accept and understand this. For instance, if someone starting from a known point in New York, measured to a point in Kansas, the co-ordinates would be different from a person that measured TO the same place but started from California. Both would be correct. Neither, unto itself, would be wrong. I therefore see it as a matter of RELATIVITY. Seven decimal places can only be relevant to a particular observation but not to ALL observations. signed, He of Little Faith

DaveD, BDT and seventhings: Thank you for your patience with me. I think I am beginning to get the drift of this. You have to understand that my idea of Lat and Long was back when I was flying Helos in the early-mid 70's. +/- a few seconds of arc was usually adequite to get us back home or to a known location. One last question: Are you folks saying that an known error (to make up numbers) of 5cm across 10 surveyed points is now averaged across them all? Thanks again.

1 cm in 10 Km is indeed an impressive accuracy rate if you are refering to the "one stick at a time" method used 50 or 100 years ago! Does this mean that a stack up of error could have been possible of 50 cm as measured 500 Km inland from the shore? It seems that if an error of 1cm/10Km from point A to point B or B to C, etc, is excellent and acceptable. But doesn't that mean that from point A to pont Z the accuracy drops tremendously? (Sorry if I am beating a dead horse here.)

So the question becomes just how accurate can a long distance measurement be? In a modern machine shop with very new and accurate equipment, 5 decimal places to the right (of an inch) can be made accurately by only the most expensivally geared facility such as in the Aerospace industry. 7 decimals to the right (of an inch) is virtually unheard of. And here, we are talking objects that are measured in inches or maybe a few feet. I still find it difficult to believe that surveyors using 'one stick at a time' were capable of 5 or 7 decimal places to the right (of a foot) and be that accurate over many miles, 50 or 100 years ago. (ohhhhh....I know.....I probably just stepped on the toes of 40 or more people on this forum!)

Thanks for the response, Crystal, but my problem is not how to file with NGS. I don't usually file my Intersection Points with them anyways. The ASR data base deals with the FCC. I was hoping to use the site to determine if a tower was the tower listed through NGS or was a replacement. Using my two examples above, that I am familiar with, I realize that I would not be able to make a decision as to authenticity on a tower that I am not familiar with using the ASR database. So I was looking for someone familiar with the site that might know if that is a correct assessment or if they can point out what I am doing wrong with the info. P.S. 7 1/2 inches of rain here in 4 days. Still coming down. 3-4 more days of it predicted. I'm NEVER gonna get to BM hunt at this rate!

I do not understand how to read the ASR pages and am looking for some help. If you look at Cornish Microwave Tower it shows CONSTRUCTED as being in 1996. This was part of the overland Microwave link put in by AT&T in the 50's and 60's. It looks to me like it was re-surveyed and re licensed in 1996. Otherwise, one might think that the tower is NOT the same tower found on the GC.com and NGS sheets. Reference: OC2757 If you look at Winn Mountain Tower You will see it says CONSTRUCTED in 1984. One might think it too was simply re-registered then since the GC.com and NGS data sheets show this to be a much older tower. In fact, the original tower collapsed in early 1984 in an ice storm and was rebuilt. Reference: OC2611 so.......how does one sort these apparent discrepencies? Am I doing something wrong and if so, can someone point me in the right direction? I am not sure how to use the ASR site to verify whether or not a tower is the authentic Intersection Point. Thanks in advance. Edited to add PID references.

holo: Once again, I thank you for your time and dedication to this bit of score-keeping. I, for one, cannot even begin to think how much time and effort you give to us here in the BM community. EXCELSIOR

ArtMan: Speaking for my neck of Maine, I have just made arrangements with a friend of mine in Androscoggin County. She and I will try to to make that bit of white on the map something a little darker. I also hope to recruit her to "our side". hehehe

Very Cool, holograph. I am delighted to see my Western Maine-Eastern New Hampshire finds showing up so darkly. Thank you for a very informative project.

Agreed. Thank you for all your time and effort Dusty. Itis very much appreciated. And thank you for being willing to take on such an undertaking Buck.

I must admit that my reports do not always show the desired "here it is" photos. I have always figured if, I as a nobody amateur can find the mark, anyone should be able to. When I find the marks difficult or the terrain of value, I certainly do include such photos.

A while back, I brought this up and was assured by you all that there is nothing to my question. Change in color Today, I recovered OC2707. Please take note of the difference in coloring between the Main Station mark and the RM's. I assume all were placed on the same day. The Main Station is clearly very black as opposed to the brass color of the RM's. I also noticed that the Main Station appears to be engraved while the RM's are stamped. I still think there is a difference in material involved here, even if it is an alloy difference. I suspect that the Main Station mark was brought to the top of the hill pre-engraved and of a different material then the RM's were. I suspect the RM's are a softer alloy for field stamping purposes.

Here is another one: GREEN MOUNTAIN LOT, OC1324, in NH. This is close to Mount Washington, where the highest recorded wind speed was taken. NOTE the heavy quantity of guy wires securing the Tower. Complete with a Warden! Meet Fire Warden Harry Libby!

Someone correct me, but from the looks of the pic of the Oregon mark named TOMB, it looks to me like the center dot is rising from the center as opposed to the indent that we usually see. I am unable to tell which way the center is going in the pic from GOLDEN HEART, but the color shade is very much different from the engraved portions of the disk leading me to think it is also rising upward. Is this correct? Is the rising center dot an indication of a GPS station?

I am not a surveyor (nor do I play one on TV). I also know the difficulty I have had in reading some of the descriptions for BM locations. As such, I always give the benefit of doubt to the BM. I assume that I may be doing something wrong when I cannot find the mark. I follow the guidelines that caseyb has outlined and will include my search attempts, time spent and why I do or do not believe in the marks' existence. I will leave it to a certified, genuine, surveyor to decide what is and isn't destroyed.

cbeach Try this thread: Monumenting 101

I agree that the occasional Topo would have happened. Here is one that I found. OC2766 is the Azimuth mark for the Station, SHEP, OC2768. I filed my pix and description on both sites: OC2768'AZIMUTH MARK, STAMPED---SHEP 1976---, IS A STANDARD DISK OC2768'CEMENTED IN A DRILL HOLE IN BEDROCK THAT IS FLUSH OC2768'WITH THE GROUND. IT IS 2.7 FEET NORTH OF THE APPROXIMATE OC2768'CENTER OF THE PAVED ROAD, 10.7 FEET SOUTH-SOUTHEAST OF A SMALL OC2768'MAPLE TREE AND ABOUT 73 FEET SOUTHWEST OF A WELL CASING. OC2768' OC2768'THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE REFERENCE MARKS WAS NOT MEASURED DUE OC2768'TO A TALL FENCE BENDING INTO, THROUGH AND ON LINE. OC2768' OC2768'THE HEIGHT OF LIGHT ABOVE THE STATION WAS 1 METER. OC2768' OC2768'DESCRIBED BY G.E. NELSON OC2768 OC2768 STATION RECOVERY (2004) OC2768 OC2768'RECOVERY NOTE BY GEOCACHING 2004 (JKS) OC2768'RECOVERED TRIANGULATION STATION SHEP DISC AT DESCRIBED LOCATION IN OC2768'GOOD CONDITION. IT IS NOW 4 INCHES BELOW GROUND LEVEL. OC2768' OC2768'RM NO.1 WAS FOUND AT DESCRIBED LOCATION IN GOOD CONDITION. IT IS NOW OC2768'3-4 INCHES UNDER THE ROADSIDE SAND. OC2768' OC2768'RM NO.2 WAS NOT RECOVERED. OC2768' OC2768'SHEP AZ MK, OC2766, WAS RECOVERED IN GOOD CONDITION AT ITS DESCRIBED OC2768'LOCATION BUT THE LOCATION DESCRIPTION THAT READS...2.7 FEET NORTH OF OC2768'THE APPROXIMATE CENTER OF THE PAVED ROAD....SHOULD READ, 72 FEET OC2768'NORTH.....

Difficult Run: My flat answer is I do not think so. As I stated earlier, most of Maine is one big piece of granite; not subject to much movement. Also, the frost line in these parts is considered to be in the range of 4-6 foot deep.

This is the first Station mark, that I have come across, that was purposely placed below ground level. OC2676 OC2676'THE STATION MARK IS A STANDARD DISK STAMPED--DEERING 1975--, OC2676'THE SURFACE DISK IS CEMENTED IN A DRILL HOLE IN SUBSURFACE OC2676'BEDROCK WHICH IS 1.8 FEET BELOW THE GROUND SURFACE. OC2676'IT IS 19-FEET WEST-SOUTHWEST OF A ROCK WALL, 21 FEET OC2676'NORTH-NORTHWEST OF A STUMP IN A ROCK WALL AND 23 FEET OC2676'EAST OF THE SOUTHEAST FENCE CORNER WHICH SURROUNDS OC2676'THE MICROWAVE TOWER. Maine mountains and hills are practically all granite. Our forests cover the ground at a rate of about one inch every ten years. Does anyone have any ideas why someone would mount a disk below ground level? With the help of two very enthusiastic abutting property owners, we located this mark originally because a large slit-style depression was in the correct area and there was a very large marker post of some sort broken off and in the hole. It was not a post typical of a Witness Post, it was much larger, and the description does not mention a Witness Post. We dug and found the marker to be about 15 inches deep in the depression. Unfortunately, my photos of the mark in the hole did not come out worth crap. EDIT NOTE: Anyone else ever come across these subsurface marks?

lillaurel, Welcome Aboard. I hope you find BM hunting to be as fun, exciting and rewarding as the rest of us here do. Allow me to put my 2 cents worth in: Bridge marks are usually very easy to find. You do not need special equipment to locate them, such as a metal detector or even a compass. They are usually scaled, but you genarally only have to look at the four corners of the bridge to find it. If you know the direction of the sun, that is all you usually need to follow the instructions with. It is a good and easy way to learn to follow the instructions. JUST PLEASE.....DO NOT start off on a high traffic bridge. You do not need to learn to find a BM AND watch for traffic at the same time. EDIT NOTE: lillaurel, some people may disagree with me here. Do not worry. Everybody here tends to disagree at one time or another. DO NOT let that turn you off! We are all here to learn together. AND to have fun!