evenfall

I think you can keep track of this and other statistics, here: http://www.holoscenes.com/special/geocac/n...tats_indiv.html Rob

Neweyess, FZ2159 HISTORY - Date Condition Recov. By FZ2159 HISTORY - 1933 MONUMENTED CGS FZ2159 HISTORY - 1934 SEE DESCRIPTION CGS FZ2159 HISTORY - 19910724 GOOD NCGS The Monumenting Survey Party May have worked this station in the winter time and so both 1933 and 34 would be correct. What they did in what order is good to know but the sequence is not such a big deal. The 1991 recovery determined that GPS was tried but was not possible, and the station is not considered good for GPS Observations... A good example of when things don't work. They had to fall back to optical survey. Yup, The disc likely covers the old stone inscriptions. From the Box Score: Z2159|---------------------------------------------------------------------| FZ2159| PID Reference Object Distance Geod. Az | FZ2159| dddmmss.s | FZ2159| NORTH CAROLINA CORNER RM 1 25.675 METERS 07321 | FZ2159| NORTH CAROLINA CORNER RM 1 RESET 28.892 METERS 07441 | FZ2159| FZ2158 GLENN APPROX. 0.8 KM 1762403.0 | FZ2159| NORTH CAROLINA CORNER RM 2 174.262 METERS 21434 | FZ2159| NORTH CAROLINA CORNER RM 3 18.748 METERS 22447 | FZ2159|---------------------------------------------------------------------| My guess the RM's do not have PID's in this case. FZ2158 is a different nearby station in and unto itself. There were 3 RM's. RM1 was destroyed and replaced in nearly the same location, So RM1 Reset is the one you are looking for if it is still extant. RM2 and 3 were found in the 1991 recovery. You said (4) We ran out of time before doing everything there we wanted but we found the witness post for FZ2158 (the disk appeared to be behind a heavily barb wired fence with many updated posted signs, but we did find reference mark #2. I can't find a PID for #2? Is there one or should I log it at FZ2159? If the RM you found is stamped Glenn RM2 then do not log it under FZ2159. From FZ2159, If the RM2 you found is not stamped NORTH CAROLINA CORNER RM 2 and is not located 174.262 METERS at 21434 degrees from the corner station, then you cannot say you found RM2 Log only the RM's you locate with the corresponding Station. If you found a RM for a Station you did not find, there is not a lot of value in logging the RM. If the station is for sure a Not Found and you are pretty sure after searching thoroughly, you can log the station as a not found but the RM is there, but if you found a disc that appeared to be there behind Barbed wire, that is a sort of shaky report. It is best to be able to be certain, either one way or the other. The weirdness factor here is FZ2592. It has a different geodetic location... Barely. FZ2159* NAD 83(1986)- 36 35 17.38553(N) 081 40 38.82238(W) ADJUSTED FZ2592* NAD 83(1986)- 36 35 17.38598(N) 081 40 38.82394(W) ADJUSTED and calls RM2 and 3 identically as the RM 2 and 3 from the Box score on FZ 2159. for both bearing and distance. Hmmmmm mmmmm ahhhhh mmmmmmmm mmm mmm Very interesting... Rob

Red Cedars and all, Regarding SY4909, Station KING. There are some cool things going on with this Station. Try using the GPS, Set to NAD83 Datum, D.M.S (Degrees Minutes Seconds Mode). This from the datasheet: NAD 83(1991)- 47 47 49.30458(N) 122 29 45.46719(W) ADJUSTED will likely appear as 47 47 49.30(N) 122 29 45.47(W) on the GPS, and if you "fly in" a waypoint for that coordinate prior to Hunting, you can use the go to function on the GPS to help find it if it has one. You may be within 5 to 10 feet of it's actual location with a good constellation and WAAS lock when the numbers match. I have also found pushing the Map resolution to the highest resolution will help you see where the numbers click over. This sort of helps you see a window of a sort of higher resolution if you understand the space between the number trips. This helps define the edges of the circle of accuracy you are getting. You could flag the areas where the numbers toggle over to establish the area it should be within. This is a Second Order Station which made it relatively important, and so the reference marks that go with it should help to locate it today. Here are the bearings and distances to the RM's SY4909| CF6823 KING RM 12.670 METERS 05245 | SY4909| CF6825 KING RM 2 50.057 METERS 22413 | SY4909| CF6826 KING RM 3 62.390 METERS 22413 | This is a cool example from the narrative, 1962 recovery which I thought many of us will enjoy THE DISK IS STAMPED KING 1934 1962. THE UNDERGROUND MARK IS BELIEVED TO BE THE ORIGINAL SURFACE MARK FOR KING 1934, ALTHOUGH IT WAS FOUND 3 FEET UNDERGROUND. THE STATION WAS REMARKED BY SETTING ANOTHER CONCRETE POST AND DISK OVER THIS MARK TO MAKE FUTURE RECOVERY EASIER. Here is an example of how the underground mark was (theoretically) used to re-establish this station when the original was found to be lost. But in this case they feel they found the surface mark in place, only buried with three feet of material. So, they stacked a third monument. This is possibly a triple stacked Station. This is the Why of the underground marks existence back when that methodology was in effect. This one actually was a surface mark that wound up treated as an underground mark and had to be the place marker! Also, in case you may not know, the RM's usually have Arrows that should point to the Station Mark and that may help. I am still a big fan of the Tape measure and it looks like you have some objects in the area that may help if they still exist. There is one more issue I would consider on this one Red. Homeland Security has the WSP patrolling the Ferry Lines with Dogs and all as you know, so there is always a State Cop at hand. You may be finding yourself in a sensitive place if you go near the water at a Ferry Landing these days, as this is an area they may not expect to find the Public. It also shares the title as one of the 2 biggest runs the Washington State Ferry System has so keep this in mind while you hunt this Station. Ferry Security has been in the news a lot as you know. I would not like to read about a Geocacher mistaken as a possible terrorist. I was on this Ferry myself a few months back, but it was dark as I headed towards Edmonds. I cannot remember the area where this mark would be located really well. I would definitely take the Real NGS Datasheet from the NGS website on this one as proof of what I am doing, Which is of course a Volunteer Hunting the Current Status of Survey Markers for the National Geodetic Survey, if asked! :-) Good hunting, Rob

Artman, Thanks for bringing this in for us to look at. A nice series of Photos. I want to call attention to what there is to see in the photos, as this site is considered good for GPS observations. Some hills and trees are in proximity, but the leaves are off the trees due to the season. It is also notable that this Photo Naming Convention is not the one Deb Brown of NGS has asked us to use when submitting our photos to NGS, So please, if you send Photos, Please follow the Naming Conventions they are asking us to use. The criteria is posted in the pinned area of the benchmark hunting forum. Since the photos are date stamped as March, it goes that the leaves would be off, improving GPS Observability, but what if it were June or July? Are the trees going to factor for GPS Observations? There are trees that will directly shade the area. This site is a GPS Site, that's a fact, but it is a potentially difficult site for GPS observations during the summer if those trees shade the instrument. In Fact, they could render it not usable at all. When we try to decide if a site will work for GPS Observations we can think of this as a site that worked in March. But we should also remember the discussions we have had here concerning the angles and proximity to items that can clutter the horizon. If we recover this in July, we may not agree with GPS observability. If you find yourself in this situation where the judgment call could be iffy, I usually practice the how bad is it test. If it is not too covered in Summer I may say it is observable, but note in the narrative that I feel there could be difficulties. If in the summer, I may note it is not observable, and yet in the winter I feel it could be, I will likely call it a no, and annotate that I feel observation may be possible in the winter. Is there a hard fast rule we can use? No. Just experience. But we can all get a feel for this, just use your experience and best Judgment. Remember all A and B orders of control are GPS control so we know that the site has been already been observed with GPS. It is just worth factoring the changes of season and even buildings that may have been put in place since original observations. In the same respect, there is no harm done in saying a station would be difficult to use for optical observations to the north if there is now a large building, or even a 10+ foot hedge at close proximity blocking the view. Just call it as you see it. Rob

Embra, Really, Degrees Minutes and Seconds to the nearest your GPS rounds is fine. This is not a big deal nor difficult. No need to hassle the conversion, But Artman's solution will certainly work if you would like to use it. Or, simply take your GPSr and go from what ever display mode you are using and set it to D.M.S, or Degree minutes and Seconds Mode. It is all there is to it. Nothing High tech to it at all. This will apply a conversion to the new display format on all waypoints currently stored in your GPS, and you will easily see the numbers change. You can change them back, they will follow you to any format in the box. The GPS itself uses a different methodology for knowing where it is actually at despite any Datum or formatting. This is more about the formatting than it is the degree of accuracy you have. The GPS will automatically convert this for you. You and I are not capable of giving more accuracy than this on our consumer grade equipment. This is not going to be used as survey data. The good news is that the GPSr will handle this for you, and though it will only go to 2 places right of the Decimal, this is level of accuracy is within 5-10 feet of the place the Mark actually is supposed to be, and not the possibility of 500-1000 feet, which scaled locations can be, and that is a big big improvement. Remember, in this case we are only trying to improve the "to find" ability of a highly accurate "Vertical Control" position. We are not getting involved in a way that will affect the Actual Survey Data at all. My professional equipment can resolve a LOT more accuracy, but remember, you are not surveying, you are only adding quality to a previously scaled position. I, when working in a professional capacity will not use this "to find" data to survey with, as I am looking for this particular type of station to check elevation, not location. It is not so anyone can survey with it, it is just so we can find the darn thing! :-) Rob

Ha Ha Matt... "What I would REALLY love to have at the event would be an honest to goodness surveyor who would be willing to show us what it is they do with a benchmark--" I would have loved to have had help not long back when I had to place a property corner on a to be developed construction site. No Bench Mark yet, we just needed to get line for some work that was soon to begin. The field had been pasture in it's day and had what was likely a 100 year old 9 wire barbed wire fence along the North line. I was thinking, ahhhh, What Barbed wire fence? I walked the whole line and did see a spot 600 feet West where there looked to be some barbed wire fence. I looked back to the East where I was to do my thing to see that this fence, if it had been put on a true East-West line, had been put well upon by one of the bigger blackberry bushes you will get to play with. And well, we could not have known it was a 9 wire fence, but while muttering, I learned it was. Yup, After I hacked and slashed my way through a 15 foot high blackberry bramble for hmmm, 25 feet diagonally, until I found the place I was supposed to set this corner. and cleared enough space around it to work. I am glad I was running GPS that day, as it was easy to survey, I even put a TBM elevation on the staked corner, but had I been on a Total Station, though I may have needed to clear a bit more, I would have had an extra Machete wielding mad man along to help. Now is that the kind of introduction you would like for finding a difficult one? :-D Just anecdotally curious, Rob

Buck, While I haven't time at the moment to look at what you have got there I can tell you that when this sort of thing happens, in my experience it is likely a location that was or is First Order triangulation, It is Likely in some cases where a Level line for establishing vertical control may intersect it as well, and the location is important to many many other surveys. I have found this to happen on property where a commanding view is often available. It may well be on property that is also privately owned and being changed from time to time, often because of the same commanding view, and so more stations are monumented and resurveyed to keep the location intact. Sometimes the old RM's are redefined to help aid in finding the new monumentation, other times they add new RM's because the old ones were lost as well and as you have seen, it can get to be a lot of data for just one place. It is not always easy to sort through. I know of several First Order stations in the Puget Sound area which have gone through this sort of ordeal. They are interesting studies unto themselves. Enjoy! Rob

Hi Jenn, GH 55 Is likely right. There are many survey monuments which we may come across in our travels, but not all of them are in the the database which Geocaching uses to play the benchmark hunting Game. if it is not, then we cannot use it as a game piece. If you are interested in hunting these more specifically, we have found it works best to look in the database for included game piece benchmarks in our local area and then specifically try to go find them. We hunt only Survey markers that are kept track of by the National Geodetic Survey. What you have found is a monument that was placed by a different agency, the USGS or Geological Survey. While some USGS monuments are listed and included in the NGS data, many are not, and so some times when we happen across these as a matter of course, we can play the game with them, and other times we can't. Sorry, I wish we could help you more, but if you like, there was a recent post here in the forum, I would say within the last few weeks, where someone had started a webpage for listing survey marks that are not listed on geocaching. Perhaps you would like to see if anyone else has found this mark, or, you could add it to that list, and the Benchmark FAQ Page has a lot of other great information you may find helpful to know if you find anymore of these while Geocaching. Have Fun! Rob

Artman and Holograph, What you are bringing into question is simply happenstance. There is no way either person could have known what the other had been working on, or planned to do, and so this could technically seem to happen. I am not sure it could be called a problem, and even if it were I cannot see how it could be avoided. What we do a month before or after the fact cannot really affect our plans because we cannot know what is pending in the database until it is revealed. (but if you know of an improved mind reading method, please share!) We could not avoid it if we wanted to. However, it does make light of the fact that the NGS database is the best source for updated data, and it is worth our time to look there before we assume anything. It is safe to say that the Geocaching database is becoming quite outdated by now. In any case, all the submissions on the mark entry page are not completely automated. They do look this way to us, but in reality are looked at with human eyes. When you fill out the form for mark recovery and submit it, it is basically databased in a pending file, so that it can be reviewed to see that things like more than one recovery per year and verbiage as such are appropriate to the data before adding to the existing datasheet. The first one in is likely the first one on, and if the second submission has nothing new to add, it will likely be omitted. This work is what may seem like it has a Lag time from the outside looking in, but in reality is but one of many functions the staff at NGS have to perform in addition to this. I think it is just the way their workload runs. It is safe, very safe to say that nobody in their office is sitting around staring at empty inboxes waiting to pounce on the next job to do. If a lot of what we send them requires how many hours of research and documentation on our parts to justify the correction of a possible or actual error, It is worth noting that even with all they may have at their disposal, they too must take the time to figure it out, as verify what we feel we had found. I know for a fact that I have given them well more than one days worth of man hours of work to do. How about anyone else? And so, we see how it is. Since we know that Deb Brown and Cheryl Malone are 2 of the primary people at NGS that we commonly deal with, is it worth remembering that we keep those folks pretty busy along with all the other people in the country who need their help as well. There are not as many people working in there as we may think, and they all have primary tasks to accomplish as well as the rest of what comes in. Some of those clients may actually need NGS assistance or data for survey reasons and that would certainly bump up to the head of the line in most cases. When we see the way the inner workings turn, it works pretty well, and as Geocachers, we have actually seen then change some of the ways they handle things on their end as based on our suggestions and ideas. It will be fun to watch and see how things continue to evolve, as I know that NGS has more in the works as based on Geocacher input, and throughput. Rob

Not to be a killjoy, But, elcamino, aka Z15 had it right and had it best. A tape measure and some chaining pins, or something that will work as a chaining pin such as a super cheap screwdriver stabbed into the ground is really the most accurate. If you like whiz bang, the Lasers and such are fun, but there are way too many times that the accuracy can get called into question because of the many things that can affect it. I guess I would have to say that they make a better indoor tool than outdoor in many instances. You may certainly do as you like but if a laser and a tape were to cost the same money. I'd buy the tape. Low tech solutions to problems really are the best option. Batteries never die, no computer to become a weak point in the process. Don't usually fail when wet or dropped. Running a tape across anything is not that difficult with the right tools and techniques. For measuring from the centerline of many average roads when you are alone, take your 25 foot self retracting tape and measure out to the edge of pavement, curb or sidewalk from the center, and stick your chaining pin or screwdriver in the dirt or grass, what have you at some amount of whole feet, then switch to your 100 foot tape, pull the pin, slip it through the end of your tape and walk in the direction you are measuring. Repeat this as many times as you need to pull your measurement. remember to pull the tape taught when reading your hard number. Add the number you pulled first from the centerline of road to the edge to what you pulled on the big tape. This method will help you get from the hard to the soft surface in most cases. When working alone, If you are on a wider hard surface than you can get to the edge of in 25 feet, use chalk and stay on the retractable. It is faster, safer and easier to handle. besides, you don't ever want a car to drive over your 100 foot tape. Now most measurements you need are not too long but you get the idea. 3 screwdrivers or chaining pins are minimum as you will be leapfrogging these and you will need to leave 2 in the ground to reference you to the straight line you are attempting to measure. Chaining pins are red and white to aid in finding them but can be hard to see at 200 feet, screwdrivers not any particular color yet at 200 feet are no different. Those little landscaping wire flags will help you find them. The wire flags also help you keep track of other points if needed so having a half dozen or so will not be a bad thing. Remember, we are often measuring from more than one point on the "to find", and if it doesn't work like we thought, if we did leave a flag, we can then double check ourselves. When we reel up the tape, I recommend wiping the reel tape with a rag to catch the dirt and grit that will be on it from laying on the ground, even in dry weather. If you do not take a shop rag or even a paper towel and do this every time, try to remember to do it when you get home or back at the car before you stow it, as leaving the tape soiled and or wet is very bad for the long term survival of them. On the retractables, wet days are tough on them too and grit on the blade will cause them to bind when retracting. At the end of the day they will need wiped dry or you will have a rusty unreadable tape next time. A nice treat for these tapes is a rag with a little WD-40 sprayed on when you retract them to displace the moisture and safeguard the tape, but only at the last wipe down, and don't use too much. Fresh WD-40 loves to attract dirt. The first use of the retractable next time may be advisable to be a re wipedown and inspection so to dry off the remaining oil, and make sure things are all happy. Getting back to Lasers. When Surveyors use Lasers, or what we call EDM, which is usually built into a Total Station. We measure between the instrument and a Prism, or reflector we place in the field and a distance above the ground... The big deal is that a clear view is desired to the prism. With the consumer device, you will likely be measuring without the prism, and near some surface which can clutter and confuse the measurement. The problem is that from where you are standing, you may think you are measuring a distance but some clutter could be being read at 5 feet closer or further and so it throws you off. The From where you are standing situation compounds itself because it could be 5 or 10 feet of error from the clutter but it looks right from the 85 or 120 feet away that you are measuring. You think it looks right and so you never realize the error slipped in. Those who like these things are welcome to keep using them but I just wanted to point out the weaknesses, and for the money, the cheap ones are far worse than the spendy, yet the spendy are susceptible as well. It is well worth considering before you lay your money down. One more alternative is to buy a measuring wheel. I have used them many times and they are great for getting in the ball park when close estimates are all you need... they are only accurate to the whole foot and of course that can get shaky the further you get from where you started but if you need to find an azimuth mark which is .55 miles away as the road or trail travels, calculating that into feet and walking the wheel is not a bad walk. You will look just lie all the other people who seem to have a reason to be there and maybe even strike up a conversation. It happens! Price is about $70, and you will likely use it over and over if you are serious at this hobby. Further as an ease of use deal, you can always see if you can find the station with the measuring wheel and flags before you resort to the tape measures. Go to the tapes if you have no luck with the wheel. It will help keep you clean dry and off your knees and that is often a good thing. The Wheel folds and fits in the trunk. Get the one with the wheel that is around a foot in diameter. Smaller wheels just won't cut it outdoors. Rob

Thanks Callaway, Yes I agree. I am sure the angles were turned for the station that may have been for the S.E section corner. The likelyhood of NGS accepting the position would have never happened if they checked and the survey didn't close. And they do check. The Station in the N.E Corner is The one described in the description and by using the description, it would lead you to the N.E. corner where both the horizontal and vertical info does not Jibe. It is likely that they meant to denote the S.E. Corner of the section, But the NGS may find triangulation data submitted for the N.E corner and not used... Hard telling until they look their files over. Based on the topo however, it appears the USGS worked both eastern corners of the section and may have errantly provided the wrong data for the intended submission. Or the right data and then mistakenly called this a N.E corner on 2 visits to the Station. Since there was nothing found (so far) at the southern location based on hunting with a GPS waypoint, I wonder what might be found a mile North, if anything. In either case the data is currently not accurate as compared to the current description so I will be interested in what might be what. Good times! Rob

Just for fun, for those who may be interested, this PDF Document will outline the methodology used for determining where these Center of Population Monuments are, and will be placed. Enjoy!

This is an interesting Station... A BLM cadastral location, Leveled and Triangulated by the USGS and Submitted to the USCGS, now known as NGS. It does not appear the NGS did anything to this other than add it to the database. It was a Station Submitted to the NGS By the USGS... It is a VABM which leads me to believe that the USGS first thought of it as a BM (Vertical work) and then later Triangulation... Ahhh Maybe... The stamping is just CORNER, 1957 VABM 2790. I mean by this is that they first located this station using PLSS Cadastral Survey Based on the Montana Principle Meridian... I am wondering if they removed the section corner to place this monument. Probably not. This, by the way, is CallawayMT territory. Ok, they leveled 2790 ft at the N.E. corner of SEC.35 T.32 N., R. 13 E. It is interesting that they borrowed Cadastral info for the name, and place the station in a Cadastral Location. Also interesting that the stamping does not match NGVD29 Values. An unusual convention for the USGS to do both ways. In this case you should be able to use either Latitude and Longitude, or the BLM Cadastral PLSS Info to get to this Station as they would both seem to describe the location. Also different is the name, "Corner" because the USGS did a lot of traverse work and often named the stations as such... For instance TT1234 or ET5678. Let's make note that a PLSS Cadastral section is roughly one square mile in size. I say roughly because they are supposed to be, but are not always. So the N.E. Corner will be one mile from any other section corner as the theory holds... If we look at this on a Map, this corner should be the Section's upper right hand corner. Was there any sign of the mentioned Reference marker: STANDARD BLM REFERENCE TABLET STAMPED ---52 RM 1945 as well? You didn't say so I am assuming you found Zero anything. If you were in the right place, and since you followed third order Triangulation to go there, I am thinking you were in the right place as far as the NGS datasheet was concerned, and I would agree that a Farmer could have utterly removed everything as Mike mentioned earlier, as boulders are hard on farm implements. From looking at the ariel photos on the BLM website, this looks like tidy farming perfection, but... We have seen things get curiouser and curiouser before... For NGS Purposes this is NAVD 88 at Vertcon Quality which is low quality for leveling but is adjusted third order horizontal soooooo... Lets look at the Superseded Data for this Station: TK0496 SUPERSEDED SURVEY CONTROL TK0496 TK0496 NAD 83(1986)- 48 28 47.83477(N) 109 59 51.93819(W) AD( ) 3 TK0496 NAD 27 - 48 28 47.86020(N) 109 59 49.13662(W) AD( ) 3 TK0496 NGVD 29 - 850.2 (m) 2789. (f) VERT ANG NGVD 29 control is 1 foot different from the stamping on the station Mark... Ok... Odd Again... It will usually match NGVD29 Values... Now here is the curiouser... When I compare USGS Topo data on Topozone.com with BLM Photogrammic images, my headache starts to throb... http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?z=12&n=537...d83&layer=DRG25 Topozone calls this section corner at roughly 48° 29' 40"N, 109° 59' 52"W (WGS84/NAD83) (WGS84/NAD83) USGS Laredo Quad It concurs with the BLM Info for the section corner, as based on internet mapping comparisons. NOT the NAD 83 Data for the section corner at BLM's site which I did not chase down. But and a BIG But! Compare this with the Current Control: NAD 83(1992)- 48 28 47.83468(N) 109 59 51.95116(W) ADJUSTED See the Road? I have placed the red "+" at the the intersection where the USGS is saying 2769 feet... This is 20 feet less than the Superseded NGVD 29 elevation, Yes? 21 feet less than the supposed stamping Yes? And it is the same spot that the BLM Photos show the N.E. corner of section 35. Yet, this geodetic location does not concur with the datasheet. I have a sense you followed the datasheet for a waypoint and may have been looking 52-53 seconds away to the South of this T intersection. I hate to say this but that is about a mile south of this intersection. But Go to 48° 29' 40"N, 109° 59' 52"W as a waypoint and you should find the intersection shown on topozone. Topozone will also show that intersection as the section corner for T32N R13E section 35. The Topozone matches BLM Photogrammic imagery for the corner. Then look 49 feet Southwest of the approximated centerline of the T intersection where where the TOPO is putting the section corner? The section corner according to the BLM Photo is at the T intersection on that road, along where the Topo Shows the Elevation on that road. I would pull a tape out 49-50 feet and use it as a swing line to probe for a boulder if any... That RM should be in an a 16 foot circle around that place 49 feet southwest of the intersection as well. Ok. Lots of changes to the area... Roads no longer cross though the BLM Data suggests that they do T last time they mapped it. So does the Topo and there may have been a dirt road connecting to the east, but not lately. This was a Graded Dirt Road and any farmer around routinely changes their dirt road set up to meet their farming need, and they are easy to plow away. No telephone poles or lines in the Ariel Photos and none in the Visit, Boulders gone maybe, possibly buried under plowed soils, Reference Marks all gone, well maybe. 45 years later... Hmmm... Did you see any Crop Circles? Nope, I am not done having fun yet.... Looky here. One mile south on this same road, I am at the S.E section Corner for SEC.35 T.32 N., R. 13 E. 48° 28' 48"N, 109° 59' 51"W (WGS84/NAD83) USGS Laredo Quad http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?z=12&n=537...d83&layer=DRG25 Look at the elevation... It is one foot off current control NAVD88 and it is also comparatively closer to Current NGS Horizontal control, in fact if you do a little rounding, it is arguably the same location as the datasheet. Oh and it seems to be a crossroad too... My Guess? The USGS blew the survey by about a Mile South here both times when they said N.E and Meant Maybe S.E. Very Scary when you have third order geodetic triangulation that does not match the BLM section corner it is supposed to be at at all when it is said to be 49 feet apart. Scarier when you looked at the Geodetic location and found nothing but you may actually find the station one mile north at the N.E corner 49 feet would be about 1 second, not 52-53... which is closer to a miles worth of feet. If you do find it in the Northerly location they turned angles on both and submitted the Data to the station a mile south for the one in the North, or something like that! :-D Sorry, but the numbers are WAY off. It would be very cool to sort it out. I can tell you that the BLM data for that corner does NOT jibe with the Geodetic location on the Datasheet, and you found nothing at the Geodetic Location... My Bet is that the USGS BM is at the real section corner like their data on the topo map shows it is, and we need to figure out which corner, and see if we also have a Typo or something going on here with the datasheet. We may find information intermixed for S.E section corner (which appears to be leveled and has a closer elevation) on the datasheet for a station we may actually find at the N.E corner of the section. I think we may want to ask Cheryl at NGS to Compare the NGS Datasheet with the USGS Data since the Topo Map concurs with the BLM Section Corner. This will be a fun little adventure, Eh? Maybe CallawayMT will chime in with a little local Knowledge too... Fun Stuff! Nothing like catching a Big Bust on 3 federal agencies by a mile if We are right eh? The only thing looking right here at the Moment is the BLM. It is a data bust right now for sure, Be nice to find this one... That will clear up the physical part of the bust. I'd check both those intersections with every tool in the box! Curiouser and curiouser... Yup, Sure enough. Who says Armchair Bench Mark Hunting isn't fun? :-D Rob

I am familiar with the Puget Sound SY series Stations, I have crossed a number of Reference Marks which were included in level lines that passed near to pre existing triangulation Stations. I have also seen a couple RM's that have been GPS'd and given some data that way too... There are stations which still exist as old as 1854 when the first Coast Survey was done in the area, if you know where to look and are properly outfitted. The hilly nature of that area was cause for a lot of leveling and the Puget sound with all it's coastline created a literal plethora of triangulation... Heavy forestation and limited sight distances were a factor as well. There are literally a ton of Stations all over Puget Sound... It is as close to a target rich environment as there is... Back 50 years ago when a lot of industry was still extant there were even tons of stacks, towers and flagpole landmarks all over the place... A good study of the stations can tell you a lot about how the Seattle area has been changing, in the post industrial age, and I am sure it is true of many other places... Good luck on the hunt! It is like a box of Chocolate... you never know... Rob

Just to take the scenario a tad further, This supports the not found theory. Sometimes we look and look with no Joy, and another person has maybe a different season or perspective, what have you. and they find it. Had the NGS version of Rules been different, someone could have given up and tried to have it destroyed, leaving the Monument in tact, with the data stricken from future use. In another scenario, some person just playing the game with a shorter attention span or different attitude may have concluded it is really gone and filed it as destroyed on GC.com... That may leave future hunters with no reason to revisit this ever again either. But here is a case where one hunter, an accomplished hunter, didn't find it, and another did. There are good days and bad ones, easy and hard, and some where our ability to find the station eludes us. But the Station is still there, Hiding from us, just waiting for the right question to be asked in the hunt, so it can be found. No harm and no foul. This station will live another day. And the database in either case is in no harm. A not found can easily become a found good or poor any day. No matter the former status. Good Hunting Bicknell! Rob

Yeah John, Most Surveyors have not been introduced to the Laughing frogs... Some are none too certain of the world beyond the windshield of their Chevy Suburban either :-) You'll have these things... Rob

Yeah, I can tell you that the travel bugs would travel alright. If a Government or Municipal Surveyor looked in there, that would likely be the last time they were seen. Not so much out of arrogance either, they would simply be doing their sort of maintenance on the station... We all routinely clean out what we find in these things. It is just the way it is. Rob

Hmmm, Well, this thread has sort of become one for the NGS forum, but since it is here I am mindful to the Game players that we may have become a bit over technical, But please forgive. I am a Pro and I can speak intelligently to what other Pros will be likely to do. On the clock I am not going to waste time with a not found. it is not in the Budget. Many of these Stations are in a Surveyor's work area and we are not required to submit an update for them, and we often do not. This is something I really want everyone to get. We do have a bunch we personally know of and we use with regularity But sometimes we are not near to one of those so we must look for an easy one to use. If I look at Datasheets and I find one that seems to meet my criteria, I read on. If it is a not found, especially with a scaled position, I am definitely not going there, nor are many other Surveyors as it is a fact finding mission we simply do not have time to perform. Telling a Surveyor not to waste time hunting something is a great service to the Surveyor. I want you to know that we do care that you did or didn't find it as this makes us more efficient, and we really appreciate that more than you might know. If it is something we can use, perfect, if someone reliable didn't find it recently, it might be good for us to move to another close by which is found. If you are hunting one and think it is there but you have a lot more hunting to do in order to find it, Fine, Don't file yet, but eventually you will decide if it is there or not, and I as a pro will be fine with that. It is not uncommon for these things to take more work than you think. In the most basic sense I can impart to you, Unless the Surveyor is doing Geodetic work and has to find these Stations to do the work, the rest of the Surveyors in the field will only want the ones that have a very high probability of being found by them, and they know there is a chance if it has been recently found, by maybe, you. If you looked for it and you feel it could be there but feel like giving up on it, Fine. Please feel free to file a not found if you enjoy NGS style recovery. if you decide to look again, you later find it, Please feel free to update the position. if you are Gaming, then do what you like. It is just a game. In my Spare time I hunt these with consumer Gear, and to tell you the truth, the first thing I try using is the Narrative description on the Datasheet. The real one from the NGS site. I like a tape measure and a Compass too. NOT my GPS. It is old school way of going about it, but in the day before GPS that was all there was. I enjoy testing the descriptions and recoveries. I also like swinging long tapes from chaining pins and using a metal probe. I do not use a Metal Detector as part of the hobby. Will I? Maybe someday. For now I don't. Besides, My spare money has to support more than one Hobby you know! :-) My experience in hunting has been that most of my not found filings are not because I could not find, but because they really are gone, but the NGS rules require a not found filing barring the right kinds of proof. Destroying these disc monuments officially is just not going to happen in most cases even when we know it is truly gone. I have had a few that stumped me, and a metal detector might have helped but oh well. One I would have had to taken time to pull a long slope for the correct horizontal measurements, and after looking at years of overgrowth I decided it would not be as doable as I'd like. I mean it is not really cool to perform clearing in a public area for a non survey. I can tell you that a great many Hunters in the Geocaching realm are outfitted quite well and many do have and use Detectors. I have been thinking of stopping by my local Staples office supply store for one of their "Easy Buttons". Do I use my GPS? Yes, I make waypoints of scaled locations, and when triangulated mark descriptions are just too weird, like for instance in your examples Bicknell, I go to the GPS to help sort it out. I am really old school and low tech about my hunting and I enjoy it this way. The difficulty and the challenge , the problem solving is the fun in this for me. I like the 5 hour hunt for a hard one better than a day where I find a bunch... In my Job, Sure I have all that gear and I have to use it, but even then, I wont be mine sweeping a field for a Bench Mark for very long. I simply need to be on the move, and that isn't moving in the direction the client will want to be billed for. In any case I am just sharing how it is for a Surveyor, Just as I explained how we use damaged Stations when we do and if we do. It is your option to believe me or not. I am also telling you how we Surveyors see it for the Power Squadron Hunter. We think it means more to you than it does for them and that is why the Geocacher is doing a better job. The important thing is that if you didn't find it and you file, then you have a brainstorm that leads you to finding it, you can always update the filing. No Harm, No Foul. All we can do is the best we can do. Rob

a/r/sf/ret, Well our own examples here show us that just as in life, we can hope for the best, but likely only expect so much. We cannot legislate the integrity of other people. We here in the Geocaching side of Station Mark Recovery seem to hold doing a good job in high esteem. Not because anyone forces this, but rather through self or statistical competition, or the nature of personal best, and the dissatisfaction of seeing shoddy work half done. In other words, this hobby is not for everyone, and it is safe to say that many in the power squadron would rather be out enjoying their personal watercraft or boat, what have you. We, on the other hand may or may not own boats, but choose to hunt Benchmarks instead of being with a boat, and so our focus is much more clear. As for a station still in position but having had its station disc pried off? Well If I come across this as a Professional, I test it like this: What kind of Data is ascribed to this and have I got the right one at the right place, If I get that, then if it is Horizontal Data, I can usually still use the center of the monument for positioning, though it is poor. It may be good enough for the need I have at the time. If I need it as a Bench Mark, well, I tend to avoid it as if it were destroyed because without the disc in place I have lost the reference point for which we check the elevation at. there is no way for me to replicate the elevation shown in the datasheet because the actual surface they used to do this has been altered beyond usability. I could get close with what remains I am sure , but close is not in the Job description. I can't certify anything if the reference is badly damaged or missing. So you see, this is what the person in the Field will have to determine upon finding whatever they do find. In the end, when we do find nothing, then that is what we find and that is what we should report if we are sure there is no further need to keep hunting anyway. Rob

Bicknell, When a did not find is logged as such, it is supposed to mean that someone did try to find the station, using everything there was written about finding it on the datasheet and did not prevail. The reasons they did not find it may be many, but are not as important as the time saved by someone on the clock trying to look for something which will likely not be found. Now we all know that the integrity of those who file these repots can vary and that this obviously affects the quality of the data, but it is also not useful to log any thoughts that we cannot confirm either. This is why the NGS set this up as empirically as they could. If you didn't find it, you didn't. Maybe someone else will see things differently that the last hunter did. Maybe they will find it, or not. As a part of the NGS Methodology, when you find that the Station is truly gone missing and you can deduct that the station was utterly destroyed, the practice was also to call it not found because you cannot physically prove how and when it met it's demise. This is a compromise, true, but it prevents people from reporting any Station they would like to as a destroyed Station. A scenario far worse than a bunch of poorly searched for not founds. Rob

T-Boys, If you like, try thinking of it like this... If we are thinking in terms of using a Cartesian coordinate system, we are trying to locate places which reside upon a surface which is flat or otherwise thought of as a Plane and could have a shape like a rectangle would have a shape or a triangle would... We could even use a Circle as long as it's surface is flat, cubic, and we could still have a plane surface if it is even cylindrical. If we are thinking in terms of using a polar coordinate system, then we are no longer trying to work in the Flat, we are instead working in the spherical. We are trying to locate specific places on the surface of a sphere or ellipsoid We could be trying to mark out the shape of a rectangle or triangle, even a circle, but the surface of those shapes would be draped over the face of the sphere and brings a different way of locating places to the table. I suppose we could also think of one system as usable in two and three dimensional on a plane and the other is three dimensional on a sphere or ellipsoid. In another thought, I suppose we could take an acre of ground and suppose it is planar in it's manner and try to describe locations within this acre with cartesian coordinates and we would likely have a high degree of accuracy. But if we grow the acre to 100, 1000, or 10,000 acres, the cartesian formulas will begin to fail in their methods of accurately expressing locations because they will not compensate for the spherical shape of the Earth Initially, before we had GPS, which we use to radio triangulate to measure the earth from space, we did so Optically. We used Triangulation, and as a part of the methodology of course, was that the line of sight would be considered Planar by nature. We were able to make the triangles fit the sphere by noting how high above the ground level at each end of the survey location we were when we performed the survey. Naturally the higher you are, the further you can see, and when the mathematical formulae, (Trig) does not have the vertical component for the instrument height the numbers won't fit right. In other words, the height of the light on both ends of the survey was a component of the mathematical formula that helped us figure the spherical components of horizontal location. Without knowing them, the survey won't properly close. Rob

It is notable to add that Professor Lupardi made reference that The Netherlands uses the WGS 84 Datum, The GRS 80 Ellipsoid Model, and the NLGEO2004 Geoid Model to help adjust their observations locally. Many Countries use the WGS 84 Datum as a "best fit" for the shape of the earth as opposed to developing their own. It is however a "global" datum and doesn't always do the best job of describing a local area to the highest precision without some help. It is also important to note a few things we probably don't think about. WGS 84 is a Datum which is used both vertically and Horizontally at the same time. Other Countries, such as the United States developed and use different Datum which they feel is a better fit for their specific area. In the U.S. instance this is NAD 83 for horizontal, and NAVD 88 for vertical. Both NGS Datum are three dimensional, just like WGS 84, however the NAD 83 is adjusted in only the Horizontal plane, and NAVD 88 in the Vertical Plane. Europe has it's own Datum which some countries there elect to use. It is called ETRF 89 (European Terrestrial Reference 89) In the case of the Netherlands, a country where the Professor indicated they are very interested in elevations, the NLGEO2004 is to them what NAVD 88 is to us in the vertical reference, and they also utilize ETRF89 to accurize European Tectonic Plate Shift on WGS 84. All the slight differences are accounted for in this way. I want to take something the Professor said apart just a little so we have a better look at it... He said, "The result of all their work is this picture where you can see that water in the North-east of the country on a distance of 40.25 m above the WGS84 ellipsoid is in equilibrium with water in the south of the country on a distance of 46.25 above the WGS84 height. This over a distance of 200 km." Look at the image The Professor provided of the NLGEO2004 geoid model. First let us keep in mind that this is a 2004 snapshot of gravitational measurement. If we do this again in 2005 or 6 we will note changes. It is pretty common to update Local Geoid Models pretty frequently. The sea level, due to the gravitational differences is 6 meters higher in the south of the country, when compared to the ellipsoidal reference (GRS80) than it is in the north of the country, just 200 Kilometers away. This is a 19.68 foot change in 124.27 miles distance. By equilibrium he meant that this is sea level, yet look at the differences in elevation. even though it only represents .003 percent change over the distance involved, it is still 19+ feet! This is why Mean sea level is a poor frame for reference because it is not only inconsistent in many ways, with a 19 foot difference in the Netherlands alone how would they know the elevations within their country if they were to assumed sea level is consistant. simply put, Gravity isn't stable and affects everything! Rob

Arkville, In this day and age, it seems we don't always get a response if we do not implicitly ask to receive one. If you like, write to Gilbert a second time and ask him if he received you previous email, and offer to see if there is something that you can do to help. He will likely answer you then :-) Rob

To All: Just to refresh everyones memory, this is no longer the appropriate place to post requests to Jeremy and Groundspeak. Jeremy hasn't mentioned it in the Benchmark Hunting Forum until recently, but he has mentioned it in other forums that the only forum he reads daily or with regularity is this one: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showforum=8 That is the Geocaching Website Forum. He asks that people bring their problems with the forum operation, and requests for new features there. So rather than post them here where they will be ignored, Go ask for the changes you would like to say or suggest at that forum, not in this thread. I mean you are asking right? Why not ask where your request has half a chance of being read. Jeremy has also mentioned in the past that he is pretty selective about his daily email, so the forum post would still likely be the best bet. Tennessee, This Pinned thread has outlived it's useful life, Is there is any chance we can "UnPin" it and let it float away? Jeremy has asked that we make all future requests in the website forum. Please think it over. Thanks, Rob

Bicknell, Testing at the most basic of levels is something where you define a criteria for observing something such as some specific property a certain way on a certain thing and then you observe it the same way many times to gather the desired information. One way the data could be looked at is how the observations compare over time. The old CGS Gravity Station is actually a triangulated station with values for what ever order horizontal survey it had, and additionally it was chosen as a place where gravimeter observations would be made and tracked. So we have triangulated the where of the testing, meaning this is a location where we want to make repeated observations and then we measure the gravity here at whatever the prescribed frequency of testing is prescribed. There is no way to collect meaningful data if a stringent practice is not followed. The procedure has a standard and methodology that has to be followed so the results remain consistent. If we come across this sort of station in the field we will immediately know that it holds additional importance and data that other stations may not have, just from seeing the additional information on the disc. There are also Magnetic stations for monitoring geomagnetism as well. Rob