Jump to content

Kewaneh & Shark

+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kewaneh & Shark

  1. When I downloaded it last evening, it also said 0+ downloads. I didn't think that could be right with the number of people waiting. It could be that the download count only refreshes daily. It says 10+ downloads today. Don't worry. That's a future enhancement! That would be sweet! The ability to log Marks from the app, and the ability to download the data (points & datasheets) for areas without cell coverage would be awesome too. ______ All that said, I've been watching this thread for some time now and waiting as anxiously as the others. I've used "FindAControl" by Critigen, and "NGS Control Points" by Software workroom also. I wanted to like "FindAControl", but between the size of the app (22.5MB!) and the fact that it looked like it was designed for a tablet vs. Droid with graphics that were too small to see/read, I didn't like or use it. "NGS Control Points" works nicely and the app takes virtually no space. I've had those on my survey crews (with capable phones) install it for use in the field. They like its functionality. In the limited amount of time I've had (12 hours) to play with "BenchMap", I like what I see. "BenchMap" seems to be a bit faster than "NGS Control Points". I think (mostly) because "BenchMap" doesn't download the points as "NGS Control Points" does. The data sheets seem to load faster too. Unless FoxTrot has any objections, I may have my crews install "BenchMap" too. While "FindAControl" and "NGS Control Points" were written primarily for surveyors (which I am), I also like the fact that "BenchMap" was written by a benchmark hunter (which I also am). Bonus! Great job FoxTrot! - Kewaneh
  2. Kewaneh & Shark


    I have a Blackberry 8310 and have run into the same problems; 404 error and/or page too large to load. My wife & I used to use our BBs frequently as caching tools, but now, since the most recent website update, we can't even log on. We've had to remember how to do things the old-school way: by printing out the cache sheets and logging our finds when we get home. Keep on Caching! - Kewaneh & Shark
  3. Patty (and Kurt) - I wish I had seen this post earlier. The California Land Surveyors Association (CLSA) did actively participate in the National Surveyor's Week activities. The State Association encouraged the local Chapters to participate by holding public events, or by participating as individuals. Some Chapters worked with local Boy Scout troops while they worked on their Surveying merit badges, and others recruited Chapter members to occupy various benchmarks throughout their area with survey-grade GPS. I am active in CLSA on both a local and State level. If you'd like any info on some of the activities, let me know. - Kevin (aka Kewaneh)
  4. Some of you may like this. A recent issue of The American Surveyor has an article about a C&GS survey crew titled, "CPS-98—An Odd Geodetic Survey Crew". From the article... The online article can be found here: http://www.amerisurv.com/content/view/8122/153/ A PDF of the article as it appeared in the magazine, complete with images, is available by clicking here: http://www.amerisurv.com/PDF/TheAmericanSurveyor_Theberge-CPS98_Vol7No9.pdf Enjoy
  5. Let me jump in with the multitudes and say Thanks for the work you've put in. Our caching adventures have slowed down a bit in the past year or two, when we have gone out, we've always looked forward to seeing the maps update to show our progress. We hit a milestone yesterday, and a few more Counties, so we were looking forward to those updates too. All that said, Thanks again for what you've provided - it's been great - and Good Luck to what you have planned with your family! Keep on Caching! - Kewaneh & Shark
  6. I would log it as destroyed on both the GC site and the NGS site. If you witnessed the mark in its original, undisturbed setting, such as on the side of a building, AND witnessed the location of said building after the building had been demolished, that's plenty of evidence of destruction, whether or not you have the mark to prove it. You may not be able to verify the mark, but you can verify the condition of the mark's setting as destroyed. - Kewaneh
  7. Here's a bit more info about the California "C" post, which the Nevada "N" post is closely related. http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...&hl=highway http://califbenchmarker.blogspot.com/searc...0%22C%22%20Post - Kewaneh
  8. Every REI store I've been in has a benchmark just outside the front doors. It's just something they do. They are not listed in the NGS database.
  9. My First Find was GU1670. I posted a full write up a few years ago in THIS THREAD. - Kewaneh
  10. Simply put, a benchmark is a point of reference used primarily by Land Surveyors, Engineers, and Geodisists for measurements of, and along, the surface of the Earth. More information can be found in the http://www.geocaching.com/mark/. Hope this helps. - Kewaneh
  11. A bit of history about the Bureau of Public Roads: The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) was created on October 15, 1966, however it has several predecessor organizations and a complicated history. The first predecessor was the Office of Road Inquiry (ORI) founded on in 1893. In 1905 that organization's name was changed to the Office of Public Roads (OPR), and it became a division of the United States Department of Agriculture. The name was changed to Bureau of Public Roads (BPR) in 1915. In 1939 the name was changed to Public Roads Administration (PRA) and it was shifted to the Federal Works Agency (FWA). With the abolition of the FWA in 1949, its name was changed back to BPR and it was shifted to the Department of Commerce. In 1967 the BPR was transferred to the newly created FHWA, and was one of three original bureaus along with the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety and the National Highway Safety Bureau (now known as NHTSA). CLICK HERE for a few pics.
  12. George - Feel free to look through my benchmark photo galleries. You might find something useful. Let me know if you find what you're looking for. - Kewaneh
  13. All three marks are cadastral marks, specifically Public Land Survey System (PLSS) corners. The first is a Closing Corner, commonly found on the north line of a township. They delineate the alignment of the north/south line between Sections in the Township to the south of the Township line. This one is for the common northerly corner between Sections 4 & 5, in Township 19 South, Range 4 East. The second monument is a standard Section Corner on the same township line, however it delineates the Sections to the Township to the north. It is the common southerly corner between Sections 32 & 33, in Township 18 South, Range 4 East. The third monument may be a Quarter Section Corner. It's difficult to tell by the picture. These PLSS monuments are not benchmarks. - Kewaneh
  14. Tosborn - I think we're arguing about the same thing here. Granted, I didn't see the locator reference in the diagram; I only read the article where there is no mention of one. I stand by my argument that using a temporary surface monument of unknown origin, in most cases, is the wrong thing to do. I also believe that an LS who stakes a project or his reputation on a temporary corner is flirting with foolishness. Penry is saying the same and I believe you are too. Am I wrong, or did I miss another part of the article? I quoted your post because, without reading the article, your post makes it sound (to me anyway, maybe not for others) that the point of the article is that using a locator in general is poor practice. When I read the article, I didn't get that. I do know that there are surveyors who do the sort of thing you and Z15 describe, however, I'm not one of them. I also believe that the majority of surveyors do their searches and surveying correctly. The prevailing attitude where you are may be to "...get a tone, paint a dot...", but it's my experience that the professional practices of the surveying community at large will regulate that surveyor out of the business. If that IS common by the survey community as a whole, the local jurisdiction may be at fault for allowing such a practice. I agree with you and Penry: a surveyor must find the proper corner. I'm not disputing that. I've personally broken many holes in the pavement in the middle of a street, and I've upset more than one crew chief when I've sent them back out to a site to dig under a nail they've found that I wouldn't accept. But that's part of the job of retracement. The OP was asking about a small marker he'd found in the middle of an intersection. It may be a survey marker of some sort. It definately would have received some attention from me if I was working in that intersection, but I didn't believe it to be a PLSS corner because of the reasons I've stated above and in earlier posts. - Kewaneh
  15. In the article you've linked, Mr. Penry is not speaking against the use of Schoenstedts or other magnetic locators, or describing it as poor practice. In fact, the description or use of a magnetic locator is not mentioned in the article at all. A magnetic locator is a very useful and often necessary tool for a surveyor, however their proper use is manditory for accurate results. In his article, Mr. Penry is issuing a warning about the use of surface monuments which are set above proper PLSS section corners, and identifying their potential for being out of position. That out-of-position potential is what I was refering to in my earlier post, although I may not have stated it as clearly. A good surveyor will rarely trust a simple surface monument, particularly if historic county records refrence a different type and/or more substantial monument. A surface monument may be used if it is documented, or if its position, relative to other nearby monuments, is within reason. A surface monument is generally only there to help locate the true and proper monument. (A magnetic locator is also only used as a help.) A nail, cotton spindle, or other temporary surface accessory is not a generally acceptable perpetuation because of the potential errors. Measuring the location of this surface accessory with modern equipment to pinpoint accuracy does not validate the location of the surface monument. For an accurate retracement of an original survey (PLSS or other) the original monuments, or accurately placed and recorded perpetuations must be found. In the last line of his article, Mr. Penry states that "...the most important tool in [a surveyor's] arsenal will always remain the pick and shovel". The surface monument needs to be dug up to find the proper monument. Modern theodolites, total stations, and GPS equipment make our work faster and easier, but they do not replace the work done by previous surveyors, either what they set, or how they set it. Mr. Penry is saying what I've said in my tagline for this forum for years: New tools are no replacement for old rules. - Kewaneh
  16. I can't dispute the possibility that either of these marks may be PLSS marks, but at first glance, I would doubt it. PLSS marks have a particular way they are to be stamped in order to be correctly identifed. These marks have none of the correct markings. They may, however, be "temporary" surface marks used to identify a proper sub-surface monument. (The term "temporary" as I'm using it here is a relative term. "Temporary" may be two decades, relative to a PLSS mounment which may have been in position for a century and a half.) All that said, I have seen proper PLSS section corners improperly marked, and not marked at all. I would tend to think that the mark shown by Reipod is simply a centerline monument. It is very common for centerline monuments and PLSS monuments to coincide in a relatively close position, often at the same horizontal position, but different vertically, with the PLSS mark set well below grade and the centerline monument above. Centerline monuments are commonly set at the surface, with nothing more than a centerpunch mark or scribed cross to identify them. The mark shown by Geosym is a similar mark, but in a much more substantial setting. A smaller mark set in the AC paving can be subject to the pavement motion (expansion, contraction, traffic loads, etc.) but an iron collar filled with concrete offer a great deal of protection from potential movement, either natural or manmade. Geosym's mark's proximity to the curbline indicates that it may not be a centerline monument, but the setting - and the scribed cross - make it a PLSS possibility. The painted "88" is probably nothing more than a random control point number used by a local surveyor, valuable only to him on the project he was working on that day. - Kewaneh
  17. It's been my experience that the surface of the bottom of the rail, the widest part that sits on the wood ties & ballast, the face where the words "property line" are painted on the image of the rail I posted, is used to identify the right-of-way boundary. I've seen them where that bottom surface faces the right-of-way (placing the rails outside of the right-of-way), and where the surface faces away from the right-of-way (placing the rails inside of the right-of-way). In the image I posted, the bottom surface faces the right-of-way. When used like this, there is no "spot" or "point" that is measured to, as the bottom surface of the rail is used to identify the line. (I should add that most railroads do not mark their right-of-ways in this manner. Of the railroads I've seen using this method, all have been smaller, regional and/or local railroad companies. In fact, most have belonged to one railroad company.) The few rails I've seen, or used, as ties to nearby projects have had punch marks or crosses on them, made by me or others to identify a particular point. - Kewaneh
  18. There are areas where the railroad company used rail sections as property line markers to identify the limits of their right-of-ways. Because of their stability, I've used them a few times as ties to a nearby survey project. Although I've never found any used as a benchmark, I would imagine that they could be used as one. They are probably every bit as stable as a benchmark set in a concrete post. Link to BIG PIC Link to GALLERY - Kewaneh
  19. Old School??? Maybe, but quadrant bearings are what surveyors currently use every day, particularly when writing metes & bounds property descriptions. Azimuth bearings, are rarely used, if ever, for that purpose. In fact, I've only seen one in the past 18+ years, and it was a "special circumstance" description. Azimuth bearings are used in geodetic work and navigation. Quadrant bearings may be "old", but they're tried & true, and, in some cases, more functional than azimuth bearings. - Kewaneh
  20. It's most likely a survey control point for the City. The survey control for most suburban (and some urban) areas usually consists of street centerline and property corner monumentation. In many dense urban areas such as inner city and downtown areas, it's common for the local jurisdiction to place additional or other monumentation to be used as survey control. Many urban areas have 'zero' lot lines, where the buildings are built to, or over, the property line, making it impossible to set a monument on the true property corner, and many areas have streets that are so busy that occupying a centerline monument would be impossible. Downtown New York City would be such an area. The mark may be used for either vertical or horizontal positioning, or both. The triangle stamped onto it indicates that it's at least a monument for horizontal positioning. Its vertical or horizontal position is most likely associated with a local coordinate system and datum, but it may also have associated data from a larger State-wide system (such as State Plane Coordinates) or national system (such as a National Vertical Datum). The number stamped onto the monument would correspond to a plan, or set of plans, on record with the local jurisdiction, most likely the City's Department of Public Works and/or City Surveyor, showing the monument's purpose as well as its location relative to the adjoining properties, rights-of-way, or infrastructure and public improvements, etc. - Kewaneh
  21. It happens. While the intent of the benchmark is for the purpose and welfare of the general public, that purpose is not always clear to that general public. To many land owners or land managers, benchmarks are just a curiosity, or something that occasionlly gets in the way. Not knowing the benchmark's importance on either a local, or global, scale means that many do get removed just becase they are 'in the way'. In my area, many marks fall in or near prime ag lands. I've seen many that have been removed by the farmers as they try to use as much of the land as possible. Here are two that I've found that had been removed for such a reason. GU3381 GU3382 - Kewaneh
  22. From a legal standpoint (in most jurisdictions) the centerline of the street is the centerline of the public right-of-way. This can be an intangible line (similar to a property line) unless marked by either centerline, right-of-way, or other type of survey monumentation. The physical street (curb, gutter, sidewalks, and roadbed) may, or may not, be centered within that right-of-way. (Just like houses aren't always centered on the house lots.) In most suburban areas, the minor roads are built to their maximum width, however the main collector and arterial streets sometimes have growing room. Past planners knew to plan for community growth when the rights-of-way were designed, but often times, the ultimate right-of-way width was more than the community needed when the road was built. They built what they needed, but planned for expansion. That expansion, which is not always symmetrical, includes additional lanes as well as turn-outs, bus bays, turn pockets, etc., and does not always affect the centerline of the street. Sometimes additional right-of-way is acquired, but the main right-of-way centerline usually remains unchanged. From a benchmarking standpoint, when the description was written, the center of the physical roadbed was most likely used. If that road has been widened, or if it's very busy now, it may be difficult to determine where that 'center' is, or was. Painted lines do not indicate a street centerline, but are only intended for traffic control, although a painted line can get you pretty close to the middle of the street. If you do find the monuments you're looking for, and want to tie it (by measurement) to a physical feature, use the curbs. While curbs do move (due to road widening) they don't move as often as a painted line in the street, which changes location every time the road is resurfaced or repainted. And I'll agree with MLoser that there is no such thing as too many references. - Kewaneh
  23. Intersection stations were used by surveyors to determine the horizontal position of a particular point on the earth's surface through a process called resection. Global Positioning Systems have made that a lot easier. Intersection stations are objects with a known horizontal (Lat/Long) position. From a point of unknown position, a surveyor would set up and sight at least three intersection stations. By measuring the angles between the known stations, the unknown position, where the surveyor was set up, could be mathmatically calculated. Once the horizontal (Lat/Long) position was known for the set up point, an azimuth between that point and one of the other known points could also be calculated, along with "true north" calculated for the immediate local area. Hope this helps. - Kewaneh
  24. Really? Why do you kill rattlesnakes? There is no need for this -- especially not to determine whether it is real or not. I see lots of rattlesnakes too. When I see them I take a picture or two but otherwise I let them be. They weren't hurting me. Why should I hurt them? If they were attacking me for their dinner, I might see it otherwise but I've found that snakes are smart enough to realize that I'm too big to eat and all they want is for me to leave them alone. The point I was making with my post was not anti-snake, or even anti-rattlesnake. The OP was concerned about a cache disguised as a fake snake scaring someone; his concern was with the cacher. My point was that one person's fright might have a detrimental affect on that cache; my concern was with the cache. I thought my comments about flying McToys and the embarassing/entertaining cache log would identify my post as relatively tounge-in-cheek without the use of a little smiley icon. Now, I don't have anything against snakes. The ARE very interesting creatures and I DO enjoy looking at them. I do take pictures of them when I have a camera available. I can immediately tell the difference between a rattle snake and a king snake and a rat snake and a gopher snake, and most other native snake species. I've had snakes as pets (if you can call a snake a pet). My kids know to watch for snakes and my older kids can tell the difference between the good ones and the bad. I will, generally, leave snakes alone. I live in an area with snakes. I work outside, sometimes in areas infested with snakes. I give them their space as long as they give me mine, but sometimes a rattle snake needs to be taken care of. Like it or not, sometimes there IS a need to kill them. When I find a rattle snake on my property (I have), or in my yard (I have), or on my porch (I have), I WILL kill it. If I don't, the next person to find it might be my three year old. I don't feel guilty about getting rid of hornets or black widows, and I don't feel guilty about getting rid of rattle snakes either. "Live and let live" is a good code to live by, but I also know the nature of the beast, and I'm not going to pretend that any spider or snake is living by the same code. People don't get bit by rattle snakes because the snake is hungry, and while a snake may be "smart" enough to know that I'm too big to eat, my younger kids aren't so big, and snakes aren't that smart. - Kewaneh
  • Create New...