Difficult Run

Ain't that cool?? Kudos to Bittsen for recognizing the logo. From there it was a simple Google photo search. Glad to help. ~ Mitch ~

1. Then how do I explane I am confused? 2. That would be defacing other peoples posts, they should have put less blank space. Fine. 1. You should use words. And explain (in detail) exactly what you don't understand about what they posted. Or you should ignore those posts that are just trying to get a response like that out of you. 2. Do it anyway. Please. ???????????????????????????? You're bossy.

Looks like this mark has been given an adjusted horizontal position, but not accurate enough to be bluebooked by the NGS. Its denoted as a triangle on the USGS map, which suggests its a traverse or triangulation station. Same for DH0946, which is 0.4 mile west. The NGS probably came along in 1947 and ran a level line, using these existing marks. ~ Mitch ~

Lol..... almost better than a FACEPALM!

That could actually work. Just be sure to post this idea on an open forum.

Check with your local parks department. Many have an orienteering course available. Also there are many online maps, try these sites: http://www.mytopo.com/maps/ (Free) Historical MyTopo Page (Free) http://www.topozone.com/ (14 day trial) http://nationalmap.gov/gio/viewonline.html (Free) Have fun, ~ Mitch ~

Ahhhh.... fresh socks! Feels better than going sockless barefoot.

Well, if the cache is taken, then the log can't be read... ... oh, do you mean an online log?

Bittsen's right. Here's a webpage with a nearly identical load: Wide Load ~ Mitch ~

Ok.... so how do you delete the 'logs'?

How can you in good conscience place a cache on private property without permission???? Somebody give me a linky to a good facepalm, please.

Wouldn't that destroy the cache as well? Oh my!

Let's be sure to discuss our "sting operation" on an open forum, where anybody can be kept up to date on what we're thinking...

Like I mentioned in a previous post on another thread... "You need to work on your social skills my friend".

It's a creative idea and you're certainly thinking outside the sandbox. However, the impact of placing this in the middle of the woods would kill any grass or plants underneath it. I doubt any land managers are going to approve this on their property. ~ Mitch ~

Hi Glorkar, There isn't an NGS datasheet for this mark, or at least any that I'm aware of. The majority of benchmarks set never meet the rigid requirements for inclusion in the NGS database. Your example is a Transit Traverse Station, hence the "TT", number F11 in the series. Probably the only info on this disk is located in a filing cabinet at the U.S.G.S. Here's a really great tool for finding NGS Benchmarks: NGS Benchmark Viewer Hope this helps, ~ Mitch ~

A Dictionary of Geographic Positions in the United States By Henry Gannett

But how would they find the underground mark if the surface mark was missing? I suppose the situation didn't arise that often.The underground mark can be relocated using known distances to one or more reference marks, (if they were set), or by establishing a new station nearby and locating the original station in a process known as resection. Today, surveyors can quickly locate an underground mark using gps, a metal detector/probe and a number 2 shovel. Here's a recovery of 120 year old triangulation station. Read more about triangulation stations here. Where ever did you find that tid bit of information? Got that from the designation of your benchmark, CLAYTON USLS 1872 .Also, the reference to a "STONE OF THE USUAL FORM" and "(PROFESSIONAL PAPERS NO. 24)" pretty much clinches it. Fortunately, there are two reference stones set for your station so you have a pretty good chance at recovering this one. ~ Mitch ~

There are generally two marks associated with a triangulation station such as yours, the surface mark and the underground mark.The underground mark is normally set about 3 feet below grade with the surface mark set directly above it, the two not being in contact with one another. The surface mark should be either flush with the surface level of the ground or protrude somewhat, with the majority of the surface mark firmly embedded in the ground. Should the surface mark be disturbed by landscaping, grading or plowing, the station can be re-established using the underground mark. There's a slight error in the description... the station was not set by the Coast & Geodetic Survey, but the United States Lake Survey (USLS). Here's a few stations which are nearly identical to yours. They all contain the phrase "stone post of the usual form": KB1150 MB2849 MB2954 MC1269 MC1280 ME2997 NC1401 NC1763 OF0905 OF1399 OF1412 OF1432 OG0908 The best clue to what the station actually looks like is found in the description for KB1150: Hope this helps, ~ Mitch ~

1956 Popular Science Magazine "Skyful of Moons: To aid navigation by ships and planes, a Chrysler Corporation missile engineer, L. Lawrence Jr., has worked out a plan to launch three satellites – Astro 1, 2, 3 – to circle the earth at 600-mile altitude in 105 minutes, in polar orbits crossing the equator at spaced intervals around the world. The satellites would constantly emit radio signals, enabling a navigator to get his bearings from the nearest one, with the help of an almanac giving each satellite’s position at any time. To power a satellite’s radio, an atomic battery would convert heat from radiactive strontium into electricity, by means of a thermopile." ~ Mitch ~

Using pesticides or herbicides on someone else's land without permission is not equivalent to hitting a mosquito that lands on your arm. Geocaching is already banned in many places because of the perception that geocaching is destructive. Spraying chemicals around a cache to kill bugs and/or plants is obviously destructive. If I personally caught a cache owner spraying pesticides in a conservation area, I wouldn't just report the cache to Groundspeak, I'd report the cache owner to the local authority. You have completely gone off the rails. Who mentioned a conservation area? No one mentioned herbicides. You have strayed far from the OP to justify your crazy own opinion. Wow, just wow. Wow Brslk,There's no need to insult Narcissa just because you disagree with her. That's completely uncalled for in the forums. I'd suggest you step back and re-think your position on this subject. Leave No Trace comes to mind. ~ Mitch ~

You need to work on your social skills my friend.

Good... and please show written permission from the landowner to place a Geocache/Concrete Block on the property.I really want to see you place this "by the guidelines", as you've promised. ~ Mitch ~ Ummm, why would written permission be required in order to be placed by the guidelines? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx "By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location." ~ Mitch ~ It says adequate, not written. Agreed, but given the tenacity and wanton disregard for the spirit of the guidelines as demonstrated by the OP, a letter of permission would be in order.(Especially if it involves a cast block of concrete). ~ Mitch ~ (Edited for punctuation)

Good... and please show written permission from the landowner to place a Geocache/Concrete Block on the property.I really want to see you place this "by the guidelines", as you've promised. ~ Mitch ~ Ummm, why would written permission be required in order to be placed by the guidelines? http://www.geocaching.com/about/guidelines.aspx "By submitting a cache listing, you assure us that you have adequate permission to hide your cache in the selected location." ~ Mitch ~

Good... and please show written permission from the landowner to place a Geocache/Concrete Block on the property.I really want to see you place this "by the guidelines", as you've promised. ~ Mitch ~