tosborn

Thanks for the clarification. In an earlier discussion of intersection stations, Holograph had the following to say: I agree with his sentiments concerning leaving the datasheet accessible.

I thought we were told that NGS was no longer interested in receiving reports for destroyed intersection stations.

Have a look at this link: Reproject NOAA BSB Raster Navigation Charts And Export Them In TIFF Format

mloser: Given the general audience Mark Stein's book was written for, most people probably won't read every State chapter. They will read about their own State, a couple of neighboring States, the State where Aunt Martha lives, and maybe one or two others. I think Stein decided that despite the duplication, it was best to have a chapter for each State that presented all the borders of that State, rather than having the reader jumping around all over the book. But there is another even more recent book that you might find more to your liking. It is called "American Boundaries: The Nation, The States, The Rectangular Survey" by Bill Hubbard Jr. It is considerably more detailed than Mark Stein's book and treats the development of US boundaries in a chronological manner. Also, about 60 percent of the 450 page book is devoted to the invention, development, and practice of the Public Land Survey System. Ever wonder how a random line was corrected to establish the true position of a quarter corner? .....it's in there and illustrated.

The book is "How the States Got their Shapes" by Mark Stein. Stein had a number of explanatory scenes during the two hours. The book is much better than the show. There is a section on each State, obviously with much more information. I recommend.

I doubt it would be Mass State Plane. Note the scale on the map.....the coordinates are in Yards. In addition to the local coordinate grid, the map also shows Lat/Long grid ticks....probably in NAD27 considering the time period. The "true north" arrow implies that the grid is aligned with geodetic north, although depending on the projection this could only be true along one meridian.

Jerry: You must not be clicking at a location where a new US Topo maps is available yet. Before you navigate anywhere on the map, click the orange button below the map window that says 'Show US Topo and "Digital Maps - Beta"'. The US map will then be overlayed with yellow and red areas. All the red areas are in Kansas and are the US Topos. The yellow areas are just the Betas (no hydrology or contours). Zoom in (for example to Topeka, KS) and put a little pin inside one of the red areas. You'll then get the list of maps you can download which will include all the raster maps as well as a new US Topo for that area. It also appears that vertical and horizontal control marks (e.g. benchmarks and triangulation stations) are not going to be shown on these "maps."

If you go to the USGS store and click on "Download Topo Map Free!" on the right it will bring up the graphical map locator. If you then click on the orange bar below the map that says 'Show US Topo and "Digital Maps - Beta"' you'll have access to and be able to see the extent of the new generation topo maps that have vector layers. The "US Topo" maps have a recent color orthophoto background overlayed with vector coutours, water courses, etc. The "Digital Maps - Beta" are maps that are in progress to becoming "US Topos" and currently missing certain layers such as contours. Coverage at the USGS store is very spotty currently. Most States have no "US Topos" or "Digitial Map - Betas". The only State that currently has "US Topos" available from the USGS Store is Kansas. I've looked at a few "US Topos" and it seems that some information shown on paper quads and DRG's, such as PLSS Section lines and forest cover, is simply missing. I guess I hoping for fully-blown vector layers for all the information that has traditionally been shown on 1:24000 quadrangles.

As you say, USGS has been providing free GeoPDF's for the past couple of years from the USGS store. When they say "constructed in GeoPDF format from key Layers of geographic data found in The National Map", it makes it sound as if the "new" maps might contain vector data instead of scans of existing quadrangles (e.g. raster data). If so the maps would be take up much less disk space, transfer quicker, would be much sharper, and would be easier to work with. Let's hope.

LSUFAN: Did you look for the Azimuth mark? OK, I see by your report you didn't. The next time you are out there, check near 32.40014N, 92.16405W to see if you can find it. Thanks for reporting back to us.

Humm..... I'm getting something a little different. Working from a couple of different aerial photos, after taking convergence angle into account, I find the azimuth of the road immediately adjacent to the area of interest to be right at 149 degrees. So, I first project RM1 from Anderson using 64.53 feet at an azimuth of 37:59:00 from the datasheet. I next project a line from RM1 at an azimuth paralleling the road of 148:58:48 (overkill on the precision, I know). Then I project a line from Anderson at an azimuth from the datasheet of 115:53:00. Where the two lines intersect should be RM2 assuming both RM's were really the same distance offset from the center of the road and that 148:58:48 is the azimuth of the road adjacent to the area of interest. This results in a distance between the RM's of a little more than 115.5 feet and a distance between Anderson and RM2 of a little more than 110 feet.

Using the azimuth to the AZ Mark, the offset from the center of Philpot Road, and the probable general location of the NS fenceline running on the SW side of the road, the Azimuth Mark is probably close to 32.40014N, 92.16405W. This also appears to agree with the 2.1 miles from the junction of Philpot Road and Highway 34 for the AZ Mark in the description. Again, for what its worth, considering that we're working from 2004 aerial photos.

Using an aerial photo of the area and applying, as best one can, the offsets of RM2 from the driveway and road (assuming they are the same driveway and road as they existed in 1971), I get 105 feet, more or less, from RM2 to the tri-station and a little more than 111 feet between RM1 and RM2. Of course these are very approximate. If I went out there I think I'd start by measuring the distance between RM1 and RM2. If it was close to 111 feet I'd have more confidence in starting probing 105 feet NW of RM2 and 64.5 feet SW of RM1. For what it's worth. P.S. all the offsets for the tri-station, RM1, and RM2 seemed to match the aerial photo pretty well except the one that says the tri-station is 105 feet SW of the Road. Based on the adjusted coordinates of the tri-station, it appears to be more like 86 feet if they measured the shortest distance from the tri-station to the center of the road.

According to this link ( http://www.wvexp.com/index.php/Booker_T_Wa...rk_(historical) ) "The 1950 West Virginia Blue Book referenced the Booker T Washington State Park as being 7.43 acre day-use only park located in Institute, WV, in Kanawha County. " There is also a ghost reference to the Booker T. Washington State Park near Dunbar, WV here: http://www.ghostsofamerica.com/2/West_Virg..._sightings.html I guess it probably did exist at one time.

I don't know, it seems unlikely to me that the area shown on the map was ever a State Park... based on the boundary shown on the map its only about 3.5 acres. That doesn't leave a lot of space for camping, etc. And there doesn't appear to be anything special there like a lake, etc. As I indicated above, I suspect it is/was probably more like a Park/Monument associated with the State University. At any rate, the "Historical" designation given this feature in the USGS Geographical Names Information System (GNIS) means that USGS believes "This feature has ceased to exist and/or no longer serves its original purpose." It looks to me like "Institute" is a place....and not part of the name of the University. On their website, WVSU says "West Virginia State University is a historically black university, which has evolved into a fully accessible, racially diverse, and multi-generational institution offering baccalaureate, associate, and graduate degrees. The suburban University is located in Institute, West Virginia, eight miles from downtown Charleston." Perhaps you should call the Huntington News or the University and ask them where the "Booker T. Washington Park of West Virginia State University" that was mentioned in the news article is located?

A Google search turned up an Oct 8, 2009 story by the The Huntington, WV News titled "Booker T. Washington Monument Dedication Set for Oct. 19 at WV State." It says ...."A monument honoring Old Malden resident Booker T. Washington will be dedicated at 12:30 p.m. Monday, Oct. 19, 2009 at Booker T. Washington Park of West Virginia State University in Institute/Old Malden, WV." I see that Institute is just West of the location of the Park as shown on the 1:24000 USGS topo. So perhaps its a Park of the State University instead of the the WV State Parks. Since the dedication is next Monday, you might want to attend. Also, there apparently is a Booker T. Washington State Park in Tennessee on Chickamauga Lake not far from the city of Chattanooga. I see a couple of websites have the information for that Park (e.g. number of campsites, etc) mixed-up with the topo map location in West Virigina.

John: You rhetorically asked...."Reporting something that will effect the search for the benchmark is not wanted now?" I think it's fine to report something significant and useful that may help someone else in the future. But there is NOTHING useful in the three NOT FOUNDS (NFs) that I cited above. The marks associated with these NFs are located in an extremely rural county (e.g. wilderness and near-wilderness) of which I am intimately familiar. In that county dense vegetation is the rule rather than the exception, and any surveyor working there would know that. He wouldn't need a half-hearted recovery report to tell him that he might encounter such vegetation. In addition, the datasheet for FG0826 makes clear that in 1971 the surface mark was 8 inches below ground surface. So nothing was added by stating that "STATION MARK IS LOCATED UNDERGROUND." How it was determined that the mark "LOOKS LIKE IT MAY BE INTACT" but "DO NOT KNOW WITHOUT A METAL DETECTOR" is beyond me. It doesn't appear that any digging occurred...after all, 8 inches isn't all that deep. Finally, stating that "I WILL TRY ANOTHER TIME" adds nothing to the report and only reflects badly on the rest of us. It wouldn't be much of a stretch from these reports to something like...."I drove past the general area of this mark, but it was raining and cold and I forgot my shovel and metal detector so I didn't stop. The mark may still be there. I'll come back later when the weather is more accommodating, so for now I'm calling it NOT FOUND." I don't see a need for anyone to "take a deep breath," and this certainly isn't a witch hunt or a mere case of not liking the style that another uses to write their logs. Submitting a recovery report to NGS is different than a report on Geocaching.com. Patty has it exactly right. I'm just surprised anyone would defend such reports. Tim

..

Here are 3 similar NOT FOUND reports from a CLJ in 2005 that really bug me. He had 52 "recoveries" in 2005 and only 1 since then. I hope all of his recoveries are not like these. FG0836 HISTORY - 20050711 MARK NOT FOUND GEOCAC FG0836'RECOVERY NOTE BY GEOCACHING 2005 (CLJ) FG0836'VEGETATION AT THE STATION LOCATION WAS QUITE HIGH. WILL TRY AGAIN FG0836'ANOTHER TIME. -------------------------- FG0837 HISTORY - 20050711 MARK NOT FOUND GEOCAC FG0837'RECOVERY NOTE BY GEOCACHING 2005 (CLJ) FG0837'VEGETATION AT THE STATION LOCATION WAS QUITE HIGH. WILL TRY AGAIN FG0837'ANOTHER TIME WITH METAL DETECTOR. -------------------------- FG0826 HISTORY - 20050716 MARK NOT FOUND GEOCAC FG0826'RECOVERY NOTE BY GEOCACHING 2005 (CLJ) FG0826'STATION MARK IS LOCATED UNDERGROUND. LOOKS LIKE IT MAY BE INTACT. DO FG0826'NOT KNOW WITHOUT A METAL DETECTOR. SEVERAL REFERENCE MARKS ARE IN THE FG0826'AREA AND SEEM TO BE IN GOOD SHAPE. WILL TRY AGAIN SOME OTHER TIME.

As the disc indicates, it's a BLM cadastral monument. In other words, it monuments a property boundary corner. From the markings I'd say it's located in section 22 and Kansas Girl and Hidden Treasure are most likely mining claims.

Unless you know something that you didn't share, it's doubtful that the two marks are "associated".....PK is a common brand of magnetic nail that is routinely used by surveyors of all types.

"Bench Mark - A relatively permanent object, natural or artificial, bearing a marked point whose elevation above or below an adopted datum is known. Usually designated as a BM, such a mark is sometimes further qualified as a PBM (permanent bench mark), or as a TBM (temporary bench mark)." From the South Dakota Office of Road Design Survey Manual, Chapter 9, Surveying Terms and Abbreviations. http://www.sddot.com/pe/roaddesign/survey_manual.asp

Looks like Jerry and I posted the same basic thoughts at the same time.

See the "User Defined Grid" section of the following link for step-by-step instructions. http://www.gpsinformation.org/dale/measure.htm The problem is, as Bill93 pointed out, using a scale factor of 3.2808399 to display the user coordinates in feet causes an overflow condition in the Northing for any location North of about 27.5 degrees latitude as the Garmin 60csx only displays at most 7 digits for user grid Northing. So with this scale factor, North of 27.5 degrees latitude, the Garmin 60csx will just display blanks for the User Grid Northing and Easting. You really have to use a scale factor of 1 (i.e. work in meters in the Garmin), and convert the survey coordinates from feet to meters unless you live in South Texas or South Florida. Another potential problem interpreting the surveyor's local survey grid (this is what the original poster was describing as opposed to a established State Plane grid), is the basis of bearing for the grid. If the surveyor's grid was relative to geodetic North then no problem. But, if the surveyor was using something else such as an assumed North, then the grid could be rotated significantly relative to geodetic North, in which case the User Grid coordinate values show on the Garmin wouldn't coincide with the local survey grid. Unlike local survey grids, survey coordinates based on State Plane projections are more readily dealt with using consumer GPS receivers, particularly Magellan receivers, which can deal with both Transverse Mercator or Lambert Conformal Conic State Plane Coordinates. Garmin receivers can only be setup to accurately display State Plane Coordinates for those States that use a Transverse Mercator projection.

Based on those coordinates, the monument marks the East Quarter Corner of T22S ,R2W, Sec 16 of the New Mexico Meridian. This is also the West Quarter Corner of T22S ,R2W, Sec 15.