evenfall

R_C, BDT is correct. This is mountainous territory and the Surveyors in 1955 turned angles on the mountain top. They did nothing else. It is just a high swing point used to establish other low order survey. SY1858 HISTORY - Date Condition Recov. By SY1858 HISTORY - 1955 MONUMENTED CGS SY1858 SY1858 STATION DESCRIPTION SY1858 SY1858''DESCRIBED BY COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY 1955 (LSB) SY1858''THE STATION WAS NOT VISITED. THE STATION IS LOCATED 6.5 MILES SY1858''SOUTHEAST OF SOL DUC HOT SPRINGS, 3 MILES SOUTHWEST OF THE SY1858''OLYMPIC HOT SPRINGS AND 1.5 MILES NORTH OF THE UPPER SOLEDUCK SY1858''SHELTER. THE HIGHEST POINT WAS INTERSECTED. SY1858''THE STATION WAS NOT VISITED. THE HIGHEST POINT WAS INTERSECTED. Nothing there. It is just a trigonometrically derived geodetic position. For fun, go ahead and hike it and make a waypoint of the peak with your GPS, See how your waypoint GPS position fares against an old theodolite, a piece of paper and a pencil. Might be fun to have a look at the position comparisons to see how good those ol' CGS Surveyors were. (P.S. they were good more often than not too!) I know the Handheld is not that accurate but it would be fun to see, just because this peak was surveyed from at least 4 positions for third order quality, all of which were far away from the peak, and a Least Squares adjustment was done. The best reason to go here to and do this is because this is a landmark style station which can safely be physically occupied by a geocacher. As a cautionary note for the benefit of all who may have wondered. The link BDT Mentioned that says "view original datasheet" on the Geocaching benchmark page is now 5 year old data. It is not getting any fresher either. It is a good thing to look at, so please use it, but to make sure there have been no changes, as there could have been something change or done on this station since the geocaching copy was made. Compare to the fresh datasheet, which is available at the NGS website. Best of all, for those looking for an easy kill, er ah I mean find; If you can accurately identify this peak from afar and your GPS can point out a go to, to the peak while you look at it, If you can see it and it is the only peak you can see which the GPS is pointing at, rather than a cluster of peaks in the sight picture, you could probably claim this as found on geocaching. As for a filing at NGS, well it is just a landmark station masquerading as a Mountain Peak. What a great disguise! A rather permanent part of earth with little change so I wouldn't... Your milage may vary :-D Rob

R_C, 1-800-424-5555 is the Washington State phone number for Utility Underground Locating, Call Before You Dig. Oh Yeah. Beings that there is an electrical substation right nearby there, that little monument you found is suuuuuper Poignant. Often the utility companes will come behind the contractors with their own company locator people and set the markers like you found just to protect the public and their investment underground. This station was a pretty good station: SY0110 HORZ ORDER - FIRST SY0110 VERT ORDER - FIRST CLASS II It was a Bench Mark Station which had also been Horizontal Control Data, Via GPS during the 1990 observation. And: SY0110_MARKER: DB = BENCH MARK DISK SY0110_SETTING: 7 = SET IN TOP OF CONCRETE MONUMENT SY0110_STAMPING: R 297 1947 The Last Survey Crew to play with this station was Evans, as in David Evans and Assoc. I have crossed paths with their guys on many different jobs in the past. Nice guys. I have played with a lot of road widenings... Every thing is surveyed before during and after. Built to plan and as built where not built to plan. When we do this we dig all the utilities up and move them, So that hopefully the utilities wind up along the road and not under it. We Remove all the topsoil as it is not a good material for compacting to structural support strengths. Then bring in appropriate structural fill, the code book for all this is as thick as a brick. The plan has detail for the corner of any vault that was set and what the height of that Vault is at finish grade. They know the flow line elevation of every wet utility pipe in the ground, and so it goes with every other thing. Lots of T's to cross and I's to dot. Every little thing is built to plans that have been detailed to the 100th of a foot. The Monument is not paved over, but the position is if the widening came all the way over to the old planter in the Church Parking lot. This station was along St Hwy 524 (Maltby Rd) and the DOT knew the station was there. They also had to know they were going to lose it. The monument has taken a long ride in the back of a Dump truck. If the topsoil was sold, Pacific Topsoils probably got it, screened the station out and got rid of it too. Or if the dirt was just bad dirt it just went in a pile somewhere. There are a lot of old gravel pits being landfilled with poor soils in the Maltby neck of the woods. A good bit of the Concrete Demolition from the Seattle area goes out there. Here is a little WSDOT Data from their database, along the same stretch of road: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/monument/report.cfm?monumentid=1814 Destroyed by the Same construction that took out SY0110... http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/monument/report.cfm?monumentid=6165 http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/monument/report.cfm?monumentid=1815 Those three stations are NOT NGS station Marks and are not in their Database. All that construction work aside, The Datasheet will tell you what to look for as you can see, so feel free to look at the datasheet. This was monumented as a BENCH MARK DISK. So a railroad spike driven in the road is not the station, no matter what. Even 2 of the 3 station recoveries mention the type of monument they found, which concur with the data. I know of a third order Tri Station that is a Railroad Spike driven in the road and the Datasheet says it is too. You see, the object must be the described object in the described location in order to be Valid. The datasheet is available 2 ways. There is one on the geocaching site which is 5 years old, or if you like the NGS site has one which is up to date. These datasheets are full of clues that the basic info on geocaching never gives us. It give us an edge to learn how to read them. There has been no NGS filing to state this station is lost. You can log this as a NOT FOUND on both Geocaching and NGS if you like. Good Luck! Rob

GH, Hey Gary, Did you notice that the Latest NGS Station Datasheet does say that this particular station has been destroyed? That is interesting. Yet here someone is finding the monument. I find myself wondering if the USGS surveyors reported it destroyed since they could not find it, heard it was destroyed as a form of hearsay? The Narrative is that Vague, or if someone checked the station in the not too distant past and reported that the Survey values were so far off so as to make it worthless. Interesting. It is unlikely a find in the geocaching database because of this destroyed status, and therefore isn't a loggable find. Bummer. It looks like this on has been taken away. Rob

sis, Perhaps the answers to your questions are in the FAQ? Spoo, Long time no see! I think since last Fall. Have been wondering how you are! Good to see you around and about! Rob

Harry, NGS has established rules that they strictly adhere to regarding the removal of a PID from their Database. As a for instance, If the Station is a Disc Type monument, or for instance a Monumentation that could be occupied by different types of survey instrument, they will refuse to destroy the data in the database to such a mark unless you can send them either the actual object that is destroyed or a photo of the disc, Legibly readable, in the state of being actually removed from it's monumentation or position. What I mean is actually removed in the empirical sense, whereas, you too are seeing the actual object in question as removed or displaced. If you find a location where the Station is surely gone but you cannot empirically see and touch the Destroyed Mark, you can not ask that it be destroyed, you can only be allowed to report it as a not found, no matter if even it really is truly gone forever. The NGS is not very flexible about this rule for good reason. It is not a safe thing to allow arbitrary reports of destruction that cannot be confirmed. Not Founds to not disrupt any data, and if a lost mark turns up later, then all is well. If not, then the positional data is at least still in tact. Landmarks are an exception to the destruction rule. You still need to provide photographic proof for the position to prove it's demise, but they are all most usually locations which cannot be occupied by a survey instrument and were never the Property of the NGS. So the standards for removal are less strict. Regarding Greed. Yes Ah, I did say Greed. But I was just repeating someone else. and I think I see where their thinking was headed... If you scroll up this thread you will read discussion that included the worries of making people angry over their scores and I could go on... Some people know that this can have undesirable side effects if we are not careful. No one is naming names. Since I am responding to you Paul, I want you to know that I am not naming any names nor singling anyone including you out. The Game at Geocaching for Benchmark hunting is a game, Games are where statistics which denote successful competition between players belong. While in NGS work I can see the value of keeping track of the work we accomplish, I can also see where the statistics can spur Competitive thinking and strategies which are not a Best fit for NGS recovery, even though they are fully fitting to the Game. These can be equated to greed. The Focus of NGS recovery is Fun, but first and foremost it is not a game. Not an exhibition or a competition. We already have a game running in parallel to the Volunteer work we do. This is the National Spatial Reference System and if we are sending information to NGS, we are updating the informations that is ascribed to it. It is about locating Stations as a Volunteer effort for NGS. Yes they are keeping track and are very thankful, Yes they have mentioned that they hope to be able to offer rewards for the work Geocachers do in the future. That is their benevolence towards us and our work. But the statistics for that are up to them. While it is fine if people want to keep track of the work they accomplish, you can do that on your personal tally sheet without it needing to be a public article of pride or Badge of Honor. When we decide to Not report something to NGS, It is arguably a Personal Choice, and who can argue a personal choice right? but it can show it's horns. If one is looking to look like a Finder and not a Not finder because of the hopes of an attractive statistical score on as based on NGS recovery Statistics, and so others can see this as a standing in a said community as a form of implied status in that community, you can do that but I feel, (Please note this is my opinion and you are welcome to not like how I feel about it) the ethics of playing a game is best kept in the Game, because there is no harm in a Game. Since we are so fortunate so as to have such a fun game going in a similar way, then I see no harm, in having all the statistical competition stay in the confines of the game. In NGS recovery we are not playing a Game, and our efforts deserve to be treated both a bit more benevolently and carefully than an obsession with statistics and a friendly competition would imply. The incentive to do this for the right reasons and to do a good, thorough recovery is a both a challenge and a reward. If we want more than that, we have the game. The NGS has a different Criteria and we will do better if we keep that criteria separate from some aspects that the Game already offers. We are doing a good deed, It is something we can feel good about, but it isn't something we should wear on our sleeve. Other wise we will be too busy "patting our own backs" with both our "Game Hand" and our "NGS hand" to do anything else. I guess I would hope that the statistics will not blind us to the good we are trying to do if we are working to help the NGS. On the other hand, in regard to the Game here at Geocaching, I say, Game on! Wilford Brimley would simply say, "It's the right thing to do" Rob

Since we can only reliably destroy landmark stations in the first place, as we otherwise need to furnish physical proof of the actual disc in it's destroyed state, this should not be too hard. Since we are talking NGS recovery in the NGS forum, We can either unequivocally prove station destruction or simply "not find" the station. The "incentive" to Voluntarily help out was affected how? :-D That sounded like Game strategy to me. Holograph did mention that he felt statistical info on NGS recovery could have affect on peoples Greed, Maybe a few others did too. let's not rush out and prove that theory correct. If that is the case, I fear that our heads and hearts are not in the right place for this volunteer activity. Maybe? Rob

Bicknell, There is one human being responsible for you getting your data loaded. She is a very busy Lady. There have also been a few NGS Server outages in the past few months. Lag time is not on nor part of her agenda, Just managing her varied workload is. It is probably not in our best interests to think of her workload as our lag time. That seems to bring connotations of something like a poor performance report, and that isn't really the impression we want to leave, is it? The NGS is not trying to appease any of us in particular, Just fulfilling the Mission is the way they think of it. If you are concerned about your submissions, just an email asking if your PID updates and such have made it safely to her desk will work. It may not have given their server problems, and she will likely be happy to check and see if they made it, or if you may have to re-submit them. Deb.Brown@noaa.gov Remember, she handles a lot of input and other duties, They all do at NGS, and after all, this is a big Country. Rob

Artman, I hate to sound all Aldous Huxley about this but it is a Brave New World. We have discussed the post 9/11 world and it all applies here... In my Father's childhood, he routinely helped my Grandfather clear stumps on their land with Dynamite. Today we should be mindful of the company we are in before even telling such a story. In my work, with asked for permission I have gained access to a lot of things which my sensibilities told me that Permission was more likely a better tact to take, than that of forgiveness. So what can we ask? Well, We can ask anything of any place. Take the time to prepare yourself for the trip you are asking to take. Know for what and where you intend to look. Be prepared to tell the agency this. Bring the real datasheets with you. Know that you may be asked what time and how long this will take place, and if they tell you when you will be granted access, be punctual, be there and be on time as they may take a dim view otherwise. They may only grant you a window of opportunity and may be freeing a person from other responsibilities to escort you. Know that they may not be interested in allowing you access to all of the places you ask. Please keep in mind that we are asking for official permission to do something which is, or ought to be important. So if we do this, let's not just do it to play a game because these agencies and places will see this as being taken advantage of their good natures and then future access will not happen. In other words, We could become our own undoing. Who do we ask? Call them and ask to speak to the Property Manager, the Head of Operations, The Owner, the Manager, the Department head. The Base Commander, the Chief, The Director, what have you. See if you can find your way to the person who can do what you want done. Ask for access to their areas and tell them why you want it and where exactly you need to go. Ask them if you need written permission from them, signed by someone official, in your possession prior to coming, and if so, ask them to mail it to you. If not, ask them for their direct access phone number should you have troubles while on their property. You may later need their help and you may not be able to foretell why. Explain to them that you understand that some of these areas may now be too sensitive to have access to. Ask them if a provided escort would be necessary and can this be arranged. If you are not there to perform an actual Survey, think over how much of a big deal this will be for them. Skip the escort if you feel it would be more than necessary, as a real survey crew may need that escort someday. Offer to provide them links to the real NGS Datasheets that will become available after you file it. Prove to them that you intended to follow through by following through and forwarding the info you helped update along. You will be creating a good will feeling towards future survey access. If they decline to allow access to the areas, then accept the answer they give you. Don't argue nor ask why. Just thank them for considering your inquiry. I can tell you that even NGS Surveyors no longer have free access to stations which were set at an earlier time. If the Navy says no, then No. Too bad so sad. We can substitute the agency known as the Navy for any agency we want. Just because I work in this field gives me no all access pass either. There are simply places we cannot any longer go. Please keep in mind that we are asking for official permission from official organizations to do something which is, or ought to be important. So if we choose to do this, let's not just do it to play a game, or be poor stewards of the permissions we have been granted or future access will not happen. Try to make the times when difficult to obtain access to an otherwise restricted area count, and report what you find to the NGS. Most of all, Try to make the agencies we deal with happy about the experience they had while working with us. I know it all seems either unlikely to be obtained or as easy to accomplish as pie with some common sense. This is but just a few of the ways to try when approaching it. Good Luck! Rob

Hi Patty, If you like NGS recovery, Feel free to report, as it would update the status to what seems to be true, or most likely for now. A not found is a not found. But it allows for the status to become a found after the fact, if the Station is later found. It sometimes happens. Do you feel a Professional from the Surveying field would have success finding it when you didn't? If I had to go looking for it at work, on the clock, I would appreciate knowing that you didn't find it. It may mean I will try another station. If you say there is no station but there is a reset, but the reset has no published data as yet then Guess what? Nothing there has any Value at this time. The things we say on Geocaching, when we recover for the Game will be read by other Geocachers. Of those who do Benchmark Hunt, the attitudes towards this seem to run from it is just a game to it is serious work and everything in between. For some it may start out casual and become more serious as they come to understand it and enjoy it or both. So we never really know where their heads are. I hesitate to say it, but the technical details will likely be lost on many. The problem is that the devil is in those very details. Bottom line, the game to many is a "just a game" and a good many will never go beyond seeing it any other way, so plan writing while keeping the person who won't care about anything, in mind. Rob

Hey Paul, I wonder if you might want to post this info over on the NGS Forum in addition to here so we have a record of it over there, as it seems to be about official NGS reporting and how NC works it... (I mean since this is mainly the game forum and all...) Just a thought, :-) Rob

Truth Be told, Squeeky wheels get greased. I don't think it will ever get done if you squeek here. Here is where you will squeek and be greased! http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showforum=8 Jeremy reads that website forum all the time and he is who you want to influence if you really want this feature. I would do my asking over there. He never reads the Benchmark forums so getting something like that done here is just falling on deaf ears. Good Luck, Rob

Artman, I concur with Mike and to add, this is on the Datasheet for the reset station: HV9372.The orthometric height was determined by differential leveling I would imagine they leveled it after resetting in 1979... And there there was a long pause... HV9372.and adjusted by the National Geodetic Survey in September 2004. HV9372.No vertical observational check was made to the station. September 2004 is why it was not in the Geocaching Database. It is said the station was set in 1979, But they only just adjusted the Data, and: HV9372.No superseded survey control is available for this station. Never had published the Data Prior to that? If so then it could not have had any published Vertical Data prior to 9/2004 If there were superseded data then it would have been in the geocaching database, as that was a snapshot of the database at the time. The 1992 recovery makes it interesting though. I wonder if they located it but could not use it due to not having published data. yet they were able to submit the recovery to the PID... Hmmmm It makes one wonder what does not meet the eye. Good Catch Artman :-) Rob

Gnikhog, makes a point but I want to look at it from the take Patty made. It is just a game. Some people think it is important to remember that this is Geocaching. I have been so reminded before myself :-D I feel it is also good to keep in mind that not everyone is playing just a game and may take action beyond the Game. That adds responsibility to it a bit eh? Yup, Geocaching is just a game. Some people will gladly tattoo that point on our foreheads. If we are conscientious, we realize that our actions can go beyond Geocaching and they do. (it is the symbiotic nature of life but don't tell anyone, it is supposed to be unique to just them only) People often take many things from one context and use them in another. Allow Me. My Grandfather had a team of Horses on his Farm back in the day, and he used to tell stories about how old Molly would avoid you when she knew you were coming to put her to work. Oh she would work well! But you had to catch her first. Molly had her own ideas. Well, I am sure you can see where I am going with this. Patty posted something informational, and now they want to use the informational stuff as the game piece. Someone could take this out of context and try to report it to the NGS and be in error, just as Patty is afraid could happen. You can try writing to these people but they will be just like old Molly, They have something else in mind and that means you will be in the tail chase there. I suppose we really need to be careful what we say and how we say it. Even if we are, other people will misread and misinterpret us easily enough. I found some stations in Seattle that needed no help. They were being misinterpreted by themselves. The Ship Canal is a canal waterway that opens Lake Washington, Lake Union to the Puget Sound in Shilshole and Salmon Bays. Crossing this Canal, were and are some very tall towers used to carry high voltage lines over the canal. Very tall so as to accommodate ships. Between now and the time the towers were originally triangulated, Seattle City Light built some new Towers next to the old ones, (actually in the 1950's to accommodate the building of Interstate 5) and ran lines. switched over and took the original towers down, but it looks like towers to the Geocacher eh? So they claim them as a find for the game and they are wrong. So too are the Power Squadron folks who keep recovering these towers. If we used Seventhings methods for verifying the landmark the truth comes out. If we look at the tower through the eyes of GPS or call the power utility, and they tell you the age of the towers too. Not as old as the monumentation on the datasheet Wrong towers, Rules be Damned? I have another where a Church underwent remodeling in 2003 and the steeple was moved to the remodeled area of the Building. Yup it is the original Steeple too, but the Geodetic position is not the original. What do you say? Good for Geocaching and Bad for NGS? Many Geocachers will not care. They see the steeple and they are gonna claim it on you because it is there. I find quite a few of these little slices of heaven, but it is just a Game... Hehehehe Unfortunately even if we see these towers from a long way off, we could think they are legit and so we claim them. The same goes for the Church Steeple. One could say there is no harm done, it is just a Game. I have been so advised myself but here we are. but the truth is in how far we take it. It would be true if the possibility of anyone going beyond the game were not possible. If it were only just the game without further ramifications which have the potential of becoming possible, we would be wrong and we could be just like the Power Squadron, and claim to NGS they are there. How can we know when someone takes this more seriously than someone else? (It is not always just a Game for Some) Either way, We cannot save or protect everything. Unless we try hard to verify and clearly report, but not over elaborate, we can cause things to happen that we didn't imagine. If instead we assume these towers or Church steeples are the real objects, We can assume a lot of things. But I know they are not. I posted notes to declare the position is incorrect, but it won't stop much. There are towers there and for some that is enough, oh, and who cares? :-) They will claim it, just as they do a monument cover in the street without looking inside for the, ah, Monument itself! We can't fix it all, and some players wont care. All we can try to make our posts on Geocaching as correct as we can while keeping in mind that we could easily be misread and misinterpreted. It happens. In the case of The Steeple, I had the Local Knowledge and I posted to NGS before anyone else could misinterpret the location. If we think this is possible, we can do the same. Beyond that, there is not too much we can do about the playing of the game. I can tell you first hand that it rarely will work. There are rules, But people don't always like the rules and oversight here, and play the way they wanna just the same. In the final analysis Patty, Feel free to file to NGS on the old station PID that a nearby reset has been made that technically could be misinterpreted as this station, and that this would be in error. Also add that there is no trace of the remaining of station, which is described under this PID. That is all the protection you can offer. The Pros will read your recovery very carefully. Have Fun Anyway! Rob

All they ask for is two photos. One Close up which they ask to be labeled C One Area shot they asked be labeled A The naming convention makes sense when you understand it. Going forth, based on discussions I've had with contacts in NGS, I think this is an evolving idea they have at NGS. It has not quite arrived where they would like it to be yet. They want to improve the Data they have in the various ways that they can. Data is just about the numbers alone though. It also has to have usability in a physical way. Finding a station is part of what makes Data usable. I am not sure there really needs to be more photos than two if they are well thought out by the photographer, but send them in either way. Try to avoid people in the photos if it is possible. If the NGS decides to put all of the photos you submit in with the datasheet, then fine, but be advised that if more than two are sent, someone else may edit you. They will choose the Two photos from you for the datasheet. If you only send two, you will have edited yourself. At least you will have made the choice. Just 2 photos per PID keeps the data under control and easy to use. It keeps the Database free to accept more photos too. As someone just said. Keeping it simple To answer Dave, I think the thought is that in the future, when things are working as the NGS hopes, and a datasheet is pulled from the database, the person looking at the data will have photos which will speak a thousand words. So the close up will speak to what the Station Disc looks like, and the area photo with the Mark showing will orient the person to look in the same direction, and orient area landmarks and details to walk right to the station. So If on your photo you were to tell people you were looking North when you took the Pic, the hunter using your photo would try to orient themselves to a North looking position and hunt for the "look" your photo has. It could be a help, and that is the hope they have. Here is a nice test, Take someone's photos off geocaching and go see if they help in finding a few marks, then after that, think of how you would fine tune the way you photograph things? People look with their eyes while standing. Can we make those photos mean more? Good Luck, Rob

NFA, Nice! Testing Border security is a good thing! Well, You know. Sorta, At least it looks like they are keeping an eye on it. I brought this up while back but it didn't generate any interest, but I did think for a time that some form of ID would help us somehow. No Biggie. However, In Lieu of that, Please consider carrying a Freshly generated Copy Of an NGS Datasheet form for each PID you are searching for with you. Consider getting this one specifically from the NGS Website, Not Geocaching. It is the best corroboration you can have in your possession for what you are doing. It is a US Government Document and it has a complete description with coordinates for what you are attempting to accomplish. Do not leave it in your car, Because as we just read, that may not be helpful to leave it in the car if an Officer won't allow you to retrieve it. Tell ANYBODY who questions you that you are Volunteer Survey Mark Hunter, Performing Public Service, and searching for Survey Stations, which you intend to report the whereabouts to a US Government Agency, You would not technically be telling a Lie, Even if you are just playing the Game, because you could report it to NGS as an insurance policy, and the papers in your hand will prove it. Beyond that it is your word against theirs. That's my story and I'm sticking to it! Rob

Holograph, I appreciate your "right minded" thinking about this, It is nice to see that you considered how you could help ease the Greed or as GH55 said, the Low Hanging Fruit passions. And thanks for making the numbers available, It looks you have managed to do what many people have been wanting. Now do you have any magic up your sleeve that will give them Pocket Queries for benchmarks? :-D Rob

Holograph, Does BDT's webpage code look like fodder for your NGS oriented webpage? I was thinking of the Fun Mission statement of course... :-D Rob

Bicknell, Seems Resistive, But I'll Bite. You are not the only Rebel in the world. Seems easier to be a rebel but not draw attention to it though. In any case should you have a change of heart, Photoshop and other programs can almost Batch Manage most of the heavy lifting though. :-D Rob

To be clear, Holograph is keeping track of NGS oriented Bench Mark Statistics on his site. The statistics he lists and formats are current with NGS supplied data, based on the day he retrieved it. I do not believe he is tracking benchmark hunting as a game. Perhaps he can let us in on his mission statement for that site. As to gaming statistics for Benchmark hunting, I am unclear if there is any third party keeping a complete updated track. Some hunters have volunteered their own informational stats in various threads in this forum. I am not sure that the geocaching site supplies comparative statistics beyond keeping each user's tally. There have been past discussions regarding the way Geocaching could provide these desired statistics, but to date, Geocaching has not altered it's way of doing business with the Benchmark hunters. I am aware that there are third party sites which keep some statistical information for geocaching, I however do not know where to send you to look at them. I came across them while browsing, and they were not that interesting to me, so I didn't keep track of them. If I knew where they were, I could not speak to how accurate or up to date they keep their information. If anyone has any leads to statistical keeping information or websites, maybe they will forward the info to this thread so those interested can look it over. Perhaps we can arrive at a consensus over what we may like to see, and present the idea to Jeremy over on his Geocaching website forum. Perhaps a template or idea can be developed from there. Good Luck, Rob

Gosh Trailslug, Have you looked in the FAQ? Good luck! Rob

Artman, Since is is not in the center, a secondary agency may have made this drill hole in the Station mark as a way of letting their field personnel know that this station is somehow significant to them... Of course you know you left yourself wide open for a lot of really silly alternative answers here too :-D Rob

BDT and all, Yup, The NGS is accepting these photos. I have sent in a bunch, Taken as per NGS requested specifications, and formatted with both the file size and naming conventions they asked for. Anyone is welcome to step up and just do it if they feel so inclined! :-) Please send them to deb.brown@noaa.gov after you have them properly formatted. She will take it from there as her workload permits. Remember, there is a lot of good we can still contribute while we wait for other aspects of this work to evolve. As an aside to Casey, Does NGS have a timeline for when a user friendly photo input page will become part of the NGS website? Can you get back to the forum on that? Thanks. Rob

FWIW, What would be wrong with just submitting things in the methods and formats they ask us for? Nothing more or less, Just follow direction. Do we always have to resist these things? How is that constructive? Any Takers? Rob

Heck No John, I would never think of asking you to take you ball and go home, I own nothing, This Forum is not mine at all, it is for everyone, and NGS recovery, The more highly Technical stuff. I wanted it for all of us, But you were very adamantly against this, so why else would I be inclined to wonder what your motive is? If you came here because you see an opportunity to argue with me. Sorry. That is not going to happen. It isn't constructive. The other people here do not deserve to read the way you seem to choose to approach me. I feel it doesn't respect them. I am sensitive to what is going on. and not just with you and I. Basically it is just that I am tired of arguing with you. I say Tomato and you say Tomahto... It always seems to wind up that way, and there never seems to be a way to lift anything up from it. It always seems that when you post in response to what I have said, I feel it is filled with snide comments and innuendoes. That isn't my style and I don't appreciate it from you. Other people disagree with me but they refrain from personalizing it. and that is nothing more than a Healthy debate and a proper usage for a forum. I am not always right nor do I expect everyone to agree. Since you only do this in regard to me "in Forum", I have no choice other than to address you in forum. I just agree we always disagree for whatever reason and there is not further any need to belabor it. All I am saying is that if you want to go to your pinned thread and teach that the Moon is made from Green Cheese, In your own words, Be my guest. Say it here, I'll likely debate you. You may even disagree with how I see this, but it is what it is. Feel free to enjoy all the forums as you like. Just know that I won't be over at that pinned thread, taking taking you to task over whatever. I think you are doing a good Job, You just do it your way. If you want to get beginning hunters off to a good start and you feel that keeping it simple is a good approach, I agree, there are a lot of people, which you have and will help with your way or methods. After awhile some people choose to delve deeper, It can become technical and involve a lengthier explanation. I actually try to come to the same side of the table. I don't Lecture, Talk at or to people, I like going with the "I am with you on this" approach. It might be unseemly, but not everyone gets all they want from simple explanations. Different strokes. If you were to know me, you would find that I am really just Rob of the corner, but that doesn't matter much now. Regarding my point, well I have exhaustively made it. We can re read it or not, but that is my take on it. Obviously I feel as I do about it. I stand for what I believe. I would not have said it if I didn't think my position had no basis. There is nothing wrong with speaking ones mind. P.S. Thanks Klemmer, Good advice. Rob

Holograph, Your Site is Just Plain Cool. Thank you for taking time to contribute as you have, as it helps us all. It is interesting to think of the statistical influences. Buck, I was thinking about how in a year we may know how this Fleshes out, But Hunters keep hunting and sending their status to NGS, and it is conceivable the workload at NGS could increase in this area. Will we every really know? It would hard to know beyond the time it takes to make the filing final in the Database. But it is nice to think of it this way. Interesting. Rob