Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by boundsgoer

  1. quote: There are several hundred acres of gold tailings here in town and a developer is looking at cost for making it environment safe and possibly building a new baseball stadium. I see these markers scattered around the site and in local neighborhoods. Papa, This is off the topic, but I shake my head when the City of Colorado Springs makes the Developer of that site fight an uphill battle because those tailings are filled with "dangerous" chemicals, etc. If the City thinks they are so dangerous, why have those tailings been allowed to erode into Fountain Creek for the last 50+ years? Why were they used for fill at the Penrose Equestrian Center? It seems to me that the City looked the other way until someone with deep pockets came along to fix the problem.
  2. What you found is a cadastral monument marking a section corner. Very few are in the NGS (and, therefore, the Geocaching) database.
  3. When John H. Clark surveyed the boundary between Texas and the south boundary of Mew Mexico in 1859, he missed the 103rd Meridian, which was supposed to be the north-south line between the two states by almost 4 miles. And that is how it remains. It is a well establish surveying and legal principle that monuments hold over direction or distance.
  4. You could file a Recovery Note, check "mark not found" and state in the notes that the building was torn down and a new one erected. Most surveyors searching for bench marks on the NGS site would read your recovery note, assume the mark was destroyed and move on to the next one.
  5. I am pretty sure it was run on a true meridian using either solar or astronomic observations (or both). The field notes would reveal the methods used.
  6. At the risk of extending the life of this thread beyond its natural life, I offer this: I am interested in a dialogue with you about the apparent jog in the 5th Principle Meridian. With work and family obligations, I have a limited amount of time to devote to perusing this message board. I generally jump in and out at work during breaks. Therefore, I have not kept up with the full discussion. Could you perhaps pose your question(s) again, keeping them brief? I have some thoughts and ideas on the possible reason for the apparent jog, but I want to make sure I understand your questions and to find out what you already know about the history of this line.
  7. I recently filed Mark Recovery's for a Control Point and a Bench Mark. I then e-mailed photos of them to Deb Brown at NGS. This is her response: "Dear Mr. Johannes, At present we are working on having an option added to the recovery form to allow folks to submit photos of their recovered stations. Until then I'm filing such photos for later loading. Please hold on to these and the others you sent me and keep an eye out on our form for this option. Hopefully we'll be able to get this going soon. Thank you, Deb Brown"
  8. In searching for control points or bench marks on the NGS site, I list all the marks within a certain radius of my project. If I find one that is near my site, but unrecovered for many years, I will extend my search further, in case the one near my project is gone. Therefore, it is helpful to know if a mark has been recovered recently. Personally, I will not file a Recovery Note if one has been filed within 2 or so years, unless some of the details of the location have changed. If it has been 3 or more years, I will file a recovery note. I do not have to add any details to the record, just check the box describing the condition.
  9. It is possible that "Seattle" denotes the location of the foundry that manufactured the lid. I think that there may be some sort of survey control point underneath. It may not be in the NGS database, however.
  10. I am curious to see DaveD's answer to your question about setting witness posts. One time I asked Deb Brown at NGS via e-mail if I could get some posts to set by control points I find. She replied that they do not do that because of the liability of having non-NGS personnel pounding posts into the ground and possibly damaging underground utilities.
  11. As a Profeesional Land Surveyor, I would love to "tackle" this, but I am having a difficult time getting my arms around just what exactly you would like to discuss. Thanks
  12. If you wanted to notify NGS about the condition of the mark, you could e-mail the PID and picture to them and let them determine if it is destroyed or not.
  13. I would guess that NASA used this point while establishing a rocket/satellite tracking station, radio relay or some installation needing a precise location.
  14. "BM 1031" as shown on the quad map indicates there is a bench mark there with the elevation shown to the nearest foot. It is not the PID. When I search for BM1031 on the NGS site, I get a data sheet for a horizontal control marker in Texas. USGS quads generally show a bench mark with an "X", the letters "BM" and the elevation to the nearest foot. Horizontal control is depicted with a triangle and the station name. Of course, we all know that not all horizontal and vertical control is shown on the quads. To find the data sheet for that particular bench mark, you can search NGS using the approximate Lat/Long obtained from scaling or your handheld.
  15. I took a look on the NGS site at your entry for bench mark EE0674. First of all, congrats on your find. This will make some surveyors job a little easier someday. May I offer a suggestion when it comes to reporting markers as "found" when previously reported as "not found"? It is all right to provide an updated "to reach", that is, directions to the marker. It may be that the "TAYLOR MERCANTILE CO. COTTON WAREHOUSE" is still there, but in the event it is not, new measurements would be very helpful to the next person looking for it. Most likely, the 1934 "to reach" is still sufficient, but I thought I would take this opportunity to jump in with a suggestion to encourage all Geocachers to update the NGS database with new directions, if applicable. I realize most Geocachers are not going to be carrying a measuring tape around, but any new information would be great. Thanks
  16. It appears to be a survey point of some sort. It could a temporary point, a traverse point or possibly a property corner. It looks like a washer affixed to the rock using a "PK" nail. Very common for surveyors to use these when they cannot set a iron rod or pipe.
  17. Could it stand for "Nebraska Roads Department"?
  18. quote:On thing - BM coordinates are more accurate than the coordinates for a cache IF the PID sheet says, just under the coordinates, "location is ADJUSTED". Alternatively, if the PID sheet says "location is SCALED", then its coordinates will be less accurate than the typical geocache. If the location is adjusted, then it is a Horizontal Control Station, with coordinates accurate to hundreths of a foot. If it is shown as scaled, then it is a Benchmark, with coordinates accurate to hundreds of feet. That is why the Data Sheet will show the coordinates for a HCS to five decimal places, and coordinates for a Benchmark to the nearest second. Surveyors will use a HCS for accurate horizontal positioning and a Benchmark for accurate vertical positioning.
  19. Here is one I recovered the other day while surveying. PID JJ060. I went to the next one 2 miles down the line, as this one was reported as "not found" by the USGS back in 1974. I had to set a property corner near this one and thought I would poke around. As I was setting the corner, I turned around and saw the edges of square concrete sticking out of the dirt. Brushed away the dirt and there it was! I think the USGS crew may have not looked too hard for this one, as the original directions to it appear to be for another marker, since the features referred to cannot be for this particular spot. Such as the crossroads. Here is the note I included in my Mark Recovery to NGS: NEW TO REACH IS AS FOLLOWS: 16.0 MILES EAST FROM THE POST OFFICE IN YODER, EL PASO COUNTY. MARK IS 59.6 FEET NORTH OF THE CENTERLINE OF STATE HIGHWAY No. 94, 2 FEET WEST OF A FENCE NORTH AND 9.6 FEET NORTH OF THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY FENCE. Good to find this one, as it is in a very rural area and control (vertical and horizontal) is hard to come by.
  20. I would, since the coordinates for benchmarks (not tri-stations) are scaled to within 6 seconds, more or less. Having the directions would come in handy.
  21. File a Mark Recovery Entry on the NGS website. Search previous posts for the link. It will be helpful to future surveyors and others looking for a benchmark to use to know that this one has been destroyed. I have spent countless hours looking for a mark that had been wasted years earlier, but the databased never indicated that fact.
  22. You may find at times that certain USGS markers are not in the NGS database. My understanding of this fact is this is because these markers were established for mapping (Quad) purposes and are not accurate enough to pass NGS muster.
  23. Assessor's maps can be incorrect, proceed with caution. Additionally, fences may not be on the right of way. In areas where the right of way is 200 feet wide or more, the railroads would build the fences close to the tracks in order that the engineers could observe them and report any damage.
  24. Assessor's maps can be incorrect, proceed with caution. Additionally, fences may not be on the right of way. In areas where the right of way is 200 feet wide or more, the railroads would build the fences close to the tracks in order that the engineers could observe them and report any damage.
  • Create New...