Zhanna

Just curious......any specific reason, Zhanna? Paul Yes, there's a reason. I don't want to hijack the thread, but here it is in a nutshell. I've been logging under the INDIV code as I was instructed to do way back in the beginning (before the GEOCAC code was obtained), and I'm planning to continue to do so. My reasoning is simply that we never know what direction things will take in the future, and it's possible that Geocachers will be seen as the next Power Squadron. I think most of our members are more conscientious than that, but things could change at any time, especially now that Geocaching is becoming a more mainstream activity. I take my recoveries seriously, and I want them to be viewed that way in the future by all who use the NGS database. I'd rather just represent myself than represent an organization (or have the organization's reputation precede me). The only reason I ever briefly considered using the GEOCAC code was to indicate to surveyors that if they required it, more information (photos) would be available at a specific site (GC.com) online. But now that NGS is accepting photo submissions and will—hopefully!—be linking them to the datasheets, that's a moot point as well. ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

I have tons of recoveries in this area, it's just that I log under INDIV instead of GEOCAC, so they don't show up in Holograph's data. Just so you don't think Northeast PA is as barren as it looks! ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

How painful, to know what's coming and not be able to change it. Please treasure every remaining minute you have with him. ~Zhanna

Nice detective work, and I see what you mean. If the thief is who I'm thinking it is, he certainly didn't cover his tracks very well. That username made me rather suspicious from the start, in fact, but their cache logs sounded innocent enough. ~Zhanna http://www.planetzhanna.com/

I just wanted to share two "gorgeous benchmark locations" I've visited this Summer. Rich in NEPA and I have both found these marks, but we are still working on our logs. GREAT HEAD (PE1783) in Acadia National Park, Maine. BURNETT (KU4050) in Palisades Interstate Park, New Jersey. This mark is a chiseled cross rather than a disk. (I sincerely hope that I am not blocking too much of the view in either case. ) Thanks, Rich, for the photos! ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

Most of the gaging stations I've found are bright green and are therefore pretty easy to spot from a distance. I don't see any green ones posted so far in this thread, though. Maybe it's just a PA thing?! Anyway, here's one example: And this is the real-time information from that station: USGS 01431500 Lackawaxen River at Hawley, PA I have (legally ) obtained several unused Gaging Station disks from an acquaintance on another forum. And over the years I've accumulated a few other types of survey disks, nails, etc. (I'm sure our resident surveyors have many more goodies than I do, but at least it's a start!) If there would be any interest, I could make a "gallery" of these items for my website, just for future reference. ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

TXcachehunter, thanks for the links! I've added them to my site. alohadavid, I'm glad you liked my website. Thanks! If you have any suggestions for anything else you'd like to see there, just let me know. ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

Hi! Welcome to benchmark hunting, and thanks for mentioning the link! Just FYI (and for the other newcomers), I have a page on my website where I collect links to state, county and city survey control databases: Local Survey Control Data I don't have anything else for MA at the moment, but there may be others for neighboring states that you would be interested in. I'm always looking for new links, too, so feel free to send me anything you come across. These databases are not always easy to find. ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

Hi! On my website, I have posted PDFs of the datasheets for many USGS marks in Yosemite. Please see: USGS Survey Mark Datasheets - California. I obtained these sheets from Patty Winter ("Wintertime"), who may pop into this thread, as well. She's familiar with the area and may be able to direct you to the proper data for the mark you found, if it is in fact a USGS mark. Keep in mind that you still won't be able to log it on the Geocaching website, but at least we may be able to satisfy your curiosity. ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

Probably, but it may take some digging around (something we benchmark hunters don't usually mind). If you're interested, here's the law as stated in the U.S. Code: From the U.S. Code Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [Laws in effect as of January 2, 2001] [Document not affected by Public Laws enacted between January 2, 2001 and January 22, 2002] [CITE: 18USC1858] TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I--CRIMES CHAPTER 91--PUBLIC LANDS Sec. 1858. Survey marks destroyed or removed Whoever willfully destroys, defaces, changes, or removes to another place any section corner, quarter-section corner, or meander post, on any Government line of survey, or willfully cuts down any witness tree or any tree blazed to mark the line of a Government survey, or willfully defaces, changes, or removes any monument or bench mark of any Government survey, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 789; Pub. L. 103-322, title XXXIII, Sec. 330016(1)(E), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2146.) Historical and Revision Notes Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., Sec. 111 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, Sec. 57, 35 Stat. 1099). Minor changes were made in phraseology. Amendments 1994--Pub. L. 103-322 substituted "fined under this title" for "fined not more than $250". The earliest date I see on there is 1909, but it looks like there are some leads here that you could follow up on and possibly trace back to an earlier version of the law. I'll see if I can come up with anything. ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

Ah! Found a slightly older one, this time from 1898: 867 USGS ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

Just to add one more interesting (old!) mark, here's an 1899 disk with the warning: 1139 H USGS ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

Thanks, Patty and Shirley, for taking care of this! I was out of town and without 'Net access for over a week (yes, I'm still twitching! ) but I'm glad you were here to point out the information on my site. When I saw the subject name I figured I'd have a post to write, but you took care of it for me. Thanks. Nice find, sevenfooter1! And welcome. ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

Oh, I doubt that! In my case, I've actually become more involved, though in ways that are not noticeable on this site. I've started serious recovery of USGS and PennDOT marks (most of which can't be logged here or reported to NGS), and I've been working on adding more relevant content to my own site, too. (More details to come soon.) I have no desire to be cured! ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

I'm here! At least, I'm still alive. Just haven't had much time for the forum lately (and I still have an e-mail of yours to respond to, too! ) Hi Jess, and Welcome! It sounds to me like you have just the personality to get hooked on benchmark hunting. Whether or not that's a good thing is up to you to decide. Have fun, try to be as accurate and precise as you can ... and feel free to share your adventures with us! ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

You can grab a bookmarklet from my site for the NGS PID search. http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/ Just drag and drop the link called "NGS PID Search" onto your Links bar or Personal Toolbar (names differ depending on which browser you're using). ~Zhanna

I've come across a few of these and have submitted them to Deb. As long as the text stated clearly and without a doubt that the mark was destroyed, she marked them as such in the database. One or two datasheets said something like "it is assumed [for whatever reason] that all of the marks were destroyed." There was no mention of the structure the mark was on having been torn down, or of the surveying party intentionally destroying the marks when setting new ones. In those cases, Deb left the datasheets as-is. I agree: if there's no doubt, why not clean up the database, and keep everything consistent? ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

Oh, I knew I could count on you to have some knowledge of this. Thanks! ~Zhanna

The 1978 recovery note for this mark: UHRIN states in part: "A SKETCH OF ROUTE TO WALK FROM ROAD FOLLOWS--". Obviously, the digital datasheet does not include a sketch. But are these sketches still available somewhere in the files of NGS? If not, what happened to them and why? I have seen local survey control databases that include such sketches in PDF files. They are extremely helpful in some cases. ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

Short answer - No, so your guess was correct. See this thread for more details: Question about stampings ... ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/

Many of the chiseled squares were carved into the corners of concrete culverts, stone abutments, etc. and are easily eroded. They can be very difficult to discern. Or, they may be obvious in person but still difficult to photograph. I have two examples on my own site: 1102.46 BM DUNMORE RESERVOIR 3 The first is one of the more typical chiseled squares, at least based on my experiences here in NEPA. It's cut right into the corner of the stone. The second is a more distinct square cut into the center of the spillway wall. ~Zhanna

Ladyofthelake, Please send DarkCacher my wishes for a quick and complete recovery. I'll keep both of you in my thoughts. This must be a difficult and frightening time for you as well. ~Zhanna

I have always submitted my reports under the INDIV code and will continue to do so. I've used the initials ZKM and JKM, and to date have submitted 83 recoveries. I keep track of them on my website: http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/officialrecoveries.shtml. ~Zhanna

Funny, this nearby cache: God's glorious view seems to have been approved without delay. I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine which has a heavier agenda. ~Zhanna

I contacted Craig Larrimore, and he has added 2005 to the list. Thanks for your quick response, Craig! ~Zhanna http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/