Papa-Bear-NYC

Halls Stream Road - mid section- Sunday late afternoon It's probably 30 miles of driving, with at least half on logging roads to get from the end East Inlet Road to the upper gate on Halls Stream Road. We had to move along to beat the arriving darkness (and heavier rain that was coming). We were after some of the reference monuments, none of which are in the NGS database, and none of which had modern locations published. I had computed the locations using nearby stations so as to change from the 1900 datum (NAD) used during the boundary survey of 1915, to a the modern datum (WSG83), but this was at best a good approximation. Here's a map of the area showing the stations and our route: Click on image to bring up live Google Map Photo album: Today's Album We were after Ref Mon 510-25, which was the only one on the east side of the road, and the 3 just before the gate, 510-16, 510-17 and 510-18. These were not set as part of the original establishment of the boundary in the 1840s, those original reference Monuments (509, 510, etc.) were cast iron posts. These were set in the 1915 survey which reestablished the boundary and they are numbered relative to the remaining original monuments. Hence there are 510-1, 510-2, etc and 511-1, 511-1 etc. The documentation said that all of these were the distinctive 8 inch bronze posts such as I had found along the St. Croix River in August of this year. They were fabricated for the survey and judging from those we had found, were very durable. We located all 4 of our targets but we soon discovered the locations were far off from my GPS coordinates (as I had suspected) and that 2 of the 4 bronze posts had evidently be damaged and were replaced by disks. We also saw signs that surveyors had been looking for these monuments as well - orange surveyor's tape was hanging from trees near each of the last 3. These things are so special that they are a thrill to find, especially knowing that very few have been seen in nearly a century before we (and the surveyors) got there this year. Here they are (in the order we found them): Ref Mon 510-25 (a replacement disk), Ref Mon 510-18 (bronze post) Ref Mon 510-17 (a replacement disk), Ref Mon 510-16 (bronze post) Now we really were done, so it was another 10 miles of logging roads and finallythe cheerful site of Buck Rub's Pizza Place, and sometime later we were back at Tall Timbers Lodge. Photos for this trek: Link to Album

East Inlet Road - Sunday Today was cloudy and at 6:00 AM (before the sun was up) it was thick fog everywhere. We were headed up to the actual northernmost point of NH, the point where Maine and NH meet at the Canadian boundary. We would search for a triangulation station I had missed when I came here a few years ago as well as checking out the conditions of a few friends (boundary monument type friends) along the way. East Inlet Road leave Route 3 about 5 miles from the border station, but since the state angles northward west of route 3, we had to drive a good 12 miles to get to the end of the road. And the "end of the road" was sooner than our last visit. See: North end of East Inlet Road near Rhubarb Pond It looks like the beavers have been busy. Here's a map of the area linked as before to the live Google Map: Click on image to bring up live Google Map About a 1/4 mile walk past the place where the road was washed out, we headed in towards the boundar, essentially heading due north along a faint herd path which led almost directly to Monument 475, which is the norther terminus of the Maine - New Hampshire state line. I had recovered this in 2006 (see my logs: QH0502 GC link). It turns out buried in front of this monument is the 1858 stone which was set by the states in the first survey to extend to the Canadian border and generally thought to have been lost (until I found it). I later reburied it so muggles and other vandals wouldn't steal it. 1858 State Line stone in front of Monument 475 (now reburied) We hiked on past the true north point of NH and then past Monument 476 to Mount Durban. When last I was there, I didn't bring the datasheet for IBC station BON DURBAN (duh!), so I just made a cursory look for the tri-station. This time I cam equipped with diagrams, 1090 foot steel tape, GPS and metal detector. Too bad! With all that stuff and about an hour's searching we found nothing (nichts!, nada!). All I found wa s tri-station set by Terres & Forets Quebec: Maybe someone can find the coordinates of this marker (any one know where to look up Quebec geodetic stations?) and with that I could compute an inverse to Bon Durban. Wouldn't hurt, if I ever decide to go back. Of course it is a 3 hour (minimum) round trip hike, and there's no guarantee I'll find my station. The rain was pretty light all day. I could swear it stopped when we got to the top of Durban and started again on the way down, and I thought "were we above the rain? But at 3000 and some odd feet elevation, I doubt it. When we got back to the car, Nate wanted to go in and find the nearby state line marker #122. I had found the spot a few years previous, and had assumed the disk was missing since there was just a pile of rock and a lot of surveyor's tape. Photo from 2006 of the location of ME-NH Monument 122. I thought the disk was gone. So we went in (it's only a few hundred yards from the road) and found the site and I showed him what I found, then I headed back to the car. When I got there, I realized he had not followed me so I waited 15 or 20 minutes and he finally showed up and said "I found it". "You found what?" "I found the disk, it was a few inches under the rocks, set in bedrock". Duh! So much for my assumptions and perseverence. Well, I guess I need to revisit this one. (Sorry no picture - Nate has an "analog" camera). But, still not done, and realizing that tomorrow's agenda of going the length of Hall's Stream Road all the way to the end would be daunting, we decided to try to knock of a few of the Reference Monuments in the mid section. The mid section of Halls Stream Road is loosely defined as that part above the lower gate (where the farms stop, and timber country begins and the road becomes a private logging road) and the upper gate, about 6 miles further up, beyond which our travel would be on foot. So check the next post for that ... GC logs for the day: MON 475 IBC MON 477 IBC BON DURBAN IBC Photo album: Today's Album

Indian Stream Road - Saturday Saturday, I met Nate at Dube's Pitt Stop, a local breakfast place. The same band of locals is there every day at 6 AM, 5 guys at one table and 4 women at another. Average age - about 70. If you sit there and listen you get the complete picture of life and times in this small town. After a hefty breakfast, we decided on a general itinerary for the weekend. Today we would explore up Indian Stream Road, tomorrow we would hit East Inlet Road, near the Maine state line, and Monday we would work our way up Halls Stream Road to the very end. On the way home Tuesday, we'd go after some odds and ends including station HEREFORD, a first order triangulation station in Quebec set in 1909 by the geodetic Survey of Canada (GSC). It was a genuine copper bolt so that would be a welcome change from the IBC disks we've been finding. Did I say "finding"? Well, not today! Yesterday I found 3 for 3 of these old IBC disks but today we'd go 0 for 2 and the rest of the weekend we would DNF another. Here's a map linked as before to the live Google Map: Click on image to bring up live Google Map We would first search for INDIAN, a major triangulation station and central to the entire New Hampshire border. Check this map (showing just part of the data on the map on the first page of this thread): Link for Triangulation Map The description was not too helpful: "ON THE NORTHERN EDGE OF THE TOP OF A HIGH KNOLL ABOUT 2-1/2 MILES WEST OF DEER MOUNTAIN AT THE HEADWATERS OF INDIAN STREAM. STATION MARK--STANDARD BRONZE DISK SET IN ROCK." Note the phrase "SET IN ROCK". Not "A ROCK" or "ROCK OUTCROP" or not evena "BURIED ROCK" like BEECHER TABLET. I was hoping my GPS and Metal Detector would make up for the sparseness of the description, as they did yesterday, but it was not to be. Nate and I spent a good 45 minutes scraping and probing every rock in the area indicated by the GPS to no avail. We did however bushwhack to the high point of the peak and signed in on the hikers register. This peak is on some peakbaggers' list for New Hampshire (see, we're not the only obsessive compulsives! ) No luck finding INDIAN NOB was not in the major triangulation scheme, it was just a tertiary station but it was "sort of" on the way we were going so we whacked in from an overgrown logging road. This was equally difficult. The one reference point was an old birch stump (old in 1915), so it was DNF #2 for the day. Bushwhacking up to the boundary The last goal was to whack to the boundary vista (a swath about 20 feet wide along the broder which is cleared of trees). and hike up to the point which is the most northerly in New Hampshire except where it meets the Maine line. This was straightforward and along the way we passed boundary Monument v 489, a granite post which replaced the original cast iron post (in 1993). It had a crack at the base, (perhaps it was struck by a snow mobile), so it looked a bit precarious. But it seemed solid enough. Monument 489 at a wet spot along the boundary vista We continued up to the northernmost point and actually found the boundary line marker (a small disk set at each turning point along the line). Line marker 489-5 - the northernmost point of this boundary section Here are the GC logs: INDIAN IBC NOB IBC MON 489 IBC And here's an album of the days adventures: Today's Album It was a great day weather-wise (if not so great in finding IBC tri-stations). Rain tomorrow

Pittsburg NH / Beecher Falls Vermont area - Friday The weather was beautiful on Friday morning from the Boston area. Once through the White Mountains, the lad flattens out and Route 3 follows the upper Connecticut River with farms and small farms. Vermont lies just across the river. I ate lunch on the road and arrived at Colebrook just after 12:00 noon. This was 5 miles from Beecher Falls, Vermont. Since I had the time, I decided to start my searches along the lower part of Halls Stream. Farm country along lower Halls Stream This is that little place where part of Vermont sicks into New Hampshire and where the last quarter mile or so of Halls Stream, which further up formed the international boundary, passes through Vermont on it's way to the Connecticut River. There were 3 triangulation stations and one boundary reference monument (Ref Mon 512) on or near Halls Stream Road that I would look for. For all but HILL TABLET, I knocked on some doors and in each case I was met by an elderly lady. Each of them couldn't have been nicer. The one whose property LOT was on, wanted me to assure her that it was in Vermont not New Hampshire (it is), since she had some kind of on-going dispute with her neighbor who lived in the next house up the road on the New Hampshire side of the state line. Here's a map showing the area. The US side shows USGS topo maps and the Canadian side uses Canvec topo maps so it looks a little confusing. You can also see how the boundary takes a right hand turn when it gets to this point and then goes across in a straight line to the west. Click on image to bring up live Google Map I was quite lucky for all three IBC triangulation stations. The GPS and metal detector helped considerably. The disks are all the same type, about 2" in diameter and unstamped, but after nearly 100 years the no two of them looked alike. LOT, HILL TABLET and BEECHER TABLET Click on the station names above the pictures to see my GC logs. Incidently, BEECHER TABLET is the easternmost NGS station in Vermont, and a First-to-Find for me. HILL TABLET was also a First-to-Find. The other find, right on the banks of the stream near HILL TABLET was Reference Monument 512. In the 1840s, 10 of these were set between the last land monument to the north (Monument 507) and the first land monument in Vermont near the mouth of Halls Stream (Monument 518). These were named Reference Monuments 508 - 517. Of these 10, 4 (513 - 516) were lost to erosion of the stream bank, and one (517) is just a stub at ground level (REF MON 517 - it is very near station LOT - Here's the GC link: REF MON 517. I recovered it a few years back). They look like the original cast iron boundary monuments, but since they don't mark the boundary (which is in mid stream) they serve as references. This one was in an idyllic spot near a farm field and was nearly overgrown. The spot was beautiful There was once a road through here with an old wooden bridge across the stream between 2 neighboring farms, one in the US and the other in Canada, A simpler time indeed. REF MON 512 with Halls Stream behind After this successful afternoon (I was 4 for 4) I drove on up to Pittsburg to Tall Timbers Lodge where I would be staying for the weekend. The next day my hiking friend turned survey mark hunter (my fault ), would arrive and the adventures would continue. Tall Timbers Lodge, Pittsburg, NH And here's a link to a photo album of the day's adventure: Day 1 album

About a month ago, I spend a long weekend in Pittsburg, New Hampshire. That's the northernmost town in the state and if you look at a map, it's the part of the state that sticks up with Maine to the east and Canada to the west. The border with Canada is a wiggly line and consists of two parts: along the north the line follows the ridge line between the Saint Lawrence watershed to the north and the Connecticut watershed to the south (this section is called the "Highlands"); along the west, the line follows Halls Stream from the very headwaters down to a point just shy of where the stream empties into,the Connecticut River. Most of the area is logging country and about 5 years ago the state of NH and the Nature Conservancy bought conservation easements on the entire area which provides for sustainable timber production, and more importantly (for me at least) public access for a variety of recreational activities, including hunting, fishing, hiking and in the winter, limited snow machine access. And I guess survey marker searching fits nicely into that scheme. The lower section of the area is devoted to farming. In fact, a fair amount of today's timber country was farmed when the border was surveyed and reestablished about a century ago. A fair amount of our time was devoted to the border that follows Halls Stream. The northern end of this, perhaps the upper 8 - 10 miles was never under cultivation and so the land tends to be very boggy and rather difficult to penetrate, since many of the reference markers were set along the stream and are just plain hard to get to. The border was originally established and marked in the 1840s, in what must have been an incredible effort, since that predated much of the farming and even some of the timber production that occurred later in the 19th century. But by the turn of the 20th century, much of the line was overgrown and many of the monuments were lost or damaged. A treaty signed in 1908 established what later became the International Boundary Commission (the IBC) and over the next decade, the entire line was remarked and surveyed to geodetic standards. The old cast iron monuments, originally set directly in the ground, were reset in concrete bases and in some cases replaced with granite monuments. A large number of triangulation stations were established at that time and a series of reference monuments were set on the banks of the various streams that the line followed such as the St. Croix, St. John and St. Francis Rivers and Halls Stream. In those cases the line followed the channels as they were in the 1840s, so due to the meandering of parts of these streams, pieces of the border that were in mid stream are now on dry land - to the consternation of local land owners (and of course the border patrol). I have visited parts of the boundary a number of times over the last several years, so one might consider this trip one of a series. To get a big picture - survey marker wise - here's a map showing the major triangulation scheme, the border monuments and the reference monuments along the stream: Click on image to bring up live Google Map This map has a lot of stuff, it even has each and every turning point of the border both on land and in the stream if you zoom way in. There are 4 types of stations shown: Red - Boundary Monuments Green - Reference markers (primarily along Halls Stream) Gray - Triangulation stations (small IBC disks) Blue - State line markers thrown in since we checked them out. If you bring up the live map, and click on a marker, you'll get information for that station and if I found it, you'll see a thumb nail photo and links to NGS and GC. But some might say that map suffers from information overload. Too darn much stuff!. OK, here's another map showing just the stations we visited on this trip: Click on image to bring up live Google Map There, that's better. We found or tried but didn't find a total of 29 markers of various sorts: Boundary monuments: 8, found all 8, 3 are not NGS Triangulation stations: 8, found 4 Reference markers: 9, found 8, none are NGS (my partner found the last one), State line markers: 4, found 3, none are NGS (my partner found the last one) Not a bad record, 23 out of 29. Of course I have to go back for those 2 I missed since now I know they're there. A word on triangulation stations - these are small bronze disks with usually NO reference marks and very little local information that's still viable. For example for station NOB, which we could not find, this is all there was: "ON THE EXTREME NORTH EDGE OF THE SUMMIT OF A KNOLL WHICH RISES ABRUPTLY FROM THE LOWLAND EXTENDING TO THE NORTHEAST, NORTH, AND SOUTHEAST OF THE STATION. ... THE REFERENCE MARK IS A SPIKE IN A BIRCH STUMP WHICH BEARS SOUTH 57 DEGREES WEST (MAGNETIC) FROM THE STATION AND IS 10.4 FEET DISTANT." You can forget about finding a birch stump that was there 100 years ago! Given this, I was very happy to find "BEECHER TABLET" which was a DNF for the IBC in 1971. Check the log for that story. (Log: QH0564) And a word on the non-NGS stations and their locations (needed for the maps and GPS): aside from the state line monuments (2 on the Vermont side and 2 on the Maine side of NH - the locations were taken off of the USGS maps), they were almost entirely the reference monuments along Halls Stream plus the last two boundary monuments near the head of Halls Stream (#506 and 507). Locations for those two were given on the IBC web site (here: Link to IBC web site}. The coordinates for the Reference Monuments were published in the 1925 IBC report: Reestablishment of the Boundary between the United States and Canada - Source of the St. Croix River to the St. Lawrence River. This is a marvelous collection of data and information on the boundary (directions for ordering a copy are given on their web site). Unfortunately the coordinates given in this volume use the North American Datum of 1900. Since I know of no algorythm for coverting these to a modern datum, I had to scale the numbers using nearby stations for which I had values in both the old and new datums. The following posts in this thread give an outline of each day's comings and goings. It was a fun trip and you can bet I'll be back there.

As usual, thanks for the great work. For my part, I can now claim the two easternmost stations in Vermont: #1) QH0564 "BEECHER TABLET" - NGS link GC link #2) QH0624 "LOT" - NGS link GC link BEECHER TABLET was a First to Find (with a DNF in 1971 by the IBC). With no local references and only a rough distance from the top of the hill (which was off by about 25 feet), it would have been hard to find. That, and the confusing and not exactly accurate description: "A BRONZE DISK CEMENTED IN A DRILL HOLE IN A BURIED ROCK". Sure, the rock was buried, but the top of the rock with the mark was above ground. A GPS and metal detector puts us a a great advantage over those who searched even as recently as 30-40 years ago. LOT was found in 1971, but was still an adventure. See the logs. While we're on the subject, the following 2 are listed in the top 10 northernmost in New Hampshire: #2) QH0498 CAMPBELL IBC #3) QH0541 NW KNOLL IBC Although listed in New Hampshire, they are actually in Canada so you may want to take them off the list. And the #1 station should really be MON 475 IBC (QH0502) QH0502. This is listed in Maine, but it defines the northernmost point of the Maine-New Hampshire border. By convention, Maine is listed since it comes alphabetically before New Hampshire, but clearly the point can legitimately be said to be in both states. (Nice thing about points - they have zero size).

YES! You uncovered one math error of mine (a typo): I used an angle of 79.9. Correct angle is 77.9. Now my result for side b (which I call side x) is 67.53 feet, in close agreement with your number under the "Richard" heading. This shows the result is not only sensitive to errors in the measured length on the opposite site (given as 121.2) but is also sensitive to errors (in this case a typo) in the angle. Time to dig!

I just ran those numbers through my formulas for the "modified" law of cosines and using alpha = 79.9 deg = 1.3945 radians y (adjacent side) = 115.8' z (opposite side) = 121.2' Solution 1: 61.44' Solution 2: -20.83' Obviously Solution 2 is out so we have 61.44' = 61' 5.3". The biggest uncertainty is side z, the distance between the 2 RMs, since that was done in the field with a tape over presumably somewhat rough ground and was not to survey standards (no offence, LSUFan) A quick check indicated that for every .1 foot error in the measurement between the RMs, the missing side calculation will change by about .3 feet. The error is magnified since the affect of z in the formula comes from the term (y**2 - z**2), the difference in the square of the length of the 2 sides. The squaring will effectively magnify the error. This is in the ball park of Difficult Run's solution which depends on the accuracy of the aerial photo. So we are definitely within spitting distance, but not quite ready to start digging. I would feel a bit more sure of my number if 1) someone could check my math and 2) if LSUFan could really measure the distance between the RMs with super care. That means make sure the two ends of the tape are at the same level and that the tape is stretched as tight as you can make it. If you are running the tape up or down a slope, you need to correct for that.

Actually, I would say yes and no. Yes, the law of cosines gives a direct unambiguous solution for the third side when it's opposite the known angle. No, it's not the case the " the Law of Cosines won't work for the example cited". In fact you can solve the law of cosines formula for the missing side and you will get a quadratic equation, which when evaluated will give the two solution illustrated by your link. I'm not sure folks want the gory details, but here they are anyway: The law if cosines states: 1) z**2 = x**2 + y**2 - 2 x y cos(alpha) where x, y and z are the three sides and alpha is the angle between sides x and y If you want side z (the one opposite the angle) it's easy, just take the square root of the right hand side. But if you want side x or side y (one of the sides adjacent to the angle) as in the present case, you just manipulate the Law of Cosines formula thus (assuming you want side x): 2) x**2 - 2 x y cos(alpha) + y**2 - z**2 = 0 Which is a quadratic equation. The standard form of the quadratic equation is a x**2 + b x + c = 0 This has 2 solutions: x = (-b + sqrt(b**2 - 4 a c))/2 a and x = (-b - sqrt(b**2 - 4 a c))/2 a For our Law of Cosines equation, the quadratic coefficients are a = 1 b = - 2 y cos(alpha) c = y**2 - z**2 And so plugging in our triangle's sides and angle, we have our 2 solutions 3a) x = (2 y cos(alpha) + sqrt(4 y**2 cos(alpha)**2 - 4(y**2 - z**2)))/2 and 3b) x = (2 y cos(alpha) - sqrt(4 y**2 cos(alpha)**2 - 4(y**2 - z**2)))/2 Although the results contain a lot of cosines and other factors and it looks complicated, if you just plug in the given sides and the cosine of the given angle, it's all just numbers. (I'm sure there must be a typo in there somewhere, I already found a couple . Feel free to check the work, that's what this forum is for.) When you come down to it, all the Laws related to solving triangles, including the Pythagorean Theorem, are all just special cases of the same general relationships that all triangles have. So for example, you can prove the Law of Cosines from the Pythagorean Theorem and vice versa. The trick is to find the simplest formula for the particular case you are faced with. I think for this particular case, you are just stuck with the dual solutions and the (slightly) complicated formula. But hey! that's why we're paid the big bucks!

If you find the station, it's probably unnecessary. However, Difficult Run is correct. Having both angles and the distance to one RM, if you could not find the station but do find both RMs, measure accurately the distance between the RMs. With this measurement, the distance from the other RM to the station could be calculated, allowing a more exact pinpointing of the station location. EDIT: Just put this down on paper and realized it wouldn't be quite as easy as I had thought. I think the exact distance could be calculated, but it'll require more thought than I'm willing to give it right at the moment. Yes, this is straight forward. Google "law of cosines" and "law of sines". These allows a complete solution of a triangle given one angle and 2 sides. Law of cosines is probably the one to use for this case.

I think there's a lot of stuff here that's already ignored. Here's a few other ideas: Idea 1) When you log a station as destroyed, you must click again that you are really sure. How about something along those lines: when a person logs a "found", a dialog comes up that asks you to go down a check list such as George proposed in the initial post, and he/she must click "Yes I all those things match" before the system lets you complete the log. Idea 2) For Geocaches, the owner (as I understand it) can delete logs that don't come up to snuff. How about something like that here where a bunch of volunteers (us) screen logs and pass them or fail them with comments back to the user. How many are logged per week? How big a task would this be? Idea 3) Require a picture. When the picture is uploaded, add a question "does this match the description?" Idea 4) Forget the whole thing, it's just human nature and won't change.

I think there's a lot of stuff here that's already ignored. Here's a few other ideas: When you log a station as destroyed, you must click again that you are really sure. How about something along those lines: Idea 1) When A person logs a "found", a dialog comes up that asks you to go down a check list such as George proposed in the initial post, and he/she must click "Yes I all those things match" before the system lets you complete the log. Idea 2) For Geocaches, the owner (as I understand it) can delete logs that don't come up to snuff. How about something like that here where a bunch of volunteers (us) screen logs and pass them or fail them with comments back to the user. How many are logged per week? How big a task would this be? Idea 3) Require a picture. When the picture is uploaded, add a question "does this match the description?" Idea 4) Forget the whole thing, it's just human nature and won't change.

As of this morning (October 20th), my NGS logs from early October have been posted. I would assume late September and early October logs are now there. Any one else see recent logs?

Good one.Can't beat the 13, but on New Hampshire's Monadnock, I found 10 out of 10 (including 2 relatsed marks mentioned in the logs but not official RMs). station my log (there are many muggles' logs) Mystery mark explained

So are we saying that the object pictured is not a misplaced reference Mark (RM7), but rather some local survey mark which was knocked over? And RM7 is still not accounted for? Yes?

It would certainly be useful to benchmark hunters (us, in other words) since they are usually hard to find because the bearing from the station is typically given in the box score, but not the distance. It would probably be of no use to surveyors or the NGS since with high accuracy GPS, they don't need it like they once did. (in fact they probably don't need the triangulation station either, but that's another issue). What they were used for was to give a surveyor the ability to determine the true direction to the other stations they were observing, rather than the relative direction, since the only thing they measure is the angles between the station observations. They would observe the azimuth mark, and then station 1, 2, and 3 (whatever) and then later in the office, they would look up the exact bearing to the azimuth mark (from the datasheet, or file cabinet in the older days), and then use that to calculate the exact bearing to the other observed marks. So by all means, put them into your log here at GC, but I wouldn't bother reporting them to the NGS.

This will be of interest to those developing or using custom topographic maps within Google maps. There is a new WMS service from NR Canada that provides a vector graphic service for Canada based on the 1:50,000 series of maps. I have been part of a discussion on the Google Maps API Developers forum. See this thread: Google Maps API Developer's Forum thread This new service is vastly superior to the old service based on raster based tiles from scanned images of the maps. I have a sample map using the new service here: MARBLE IBC sample map If you bring up this map, a USGS based topo of Marble Mountain, on the Canadian border in Maine should appear. If you then change the map type using the selector in the upper right, beside the usual map types, you can select either "CanRas" (the old raster service) or "CanVec" (the new vector service). The new map type looks quite good, especially when compared to the older version. The only drawback is that it only supports zoom levels 11-18. The old service (and most map types) go out much farther, to 7 or 8. The new service will take you out to about 3 miles to the inch (on my screen, YMMV). This should be adequate for most benchmarking uses, you just won't see a whole county or province. I have searched for a number of markers on or near the border, so this is valuable to me. For those interested in the code, it's in this file: JS Script It is based on code originally written by Jef Poskanzer of Acme Mapper, since modified by others and myself.

Thanks for the detailed points and thanks especially for taking the time to put them down. There are some good ideas here and some wouldn't be hard at all to implement. I'll mention a few ideas, which is not to say I can't address the other points. I'm thinking a quick fix would be to just put the day in front of the caption. so "Columbia Covered Bridge & Monadnock" would become "Thursday - Columbia Covered Bridge & Monadnock" I'll think about the best approach here. At a minimum I could put a small note at the bottom of the introduction section, something like "This report is divided into this introduction and 5 sections. Use the table below to jump to any section or use the "Next" and "Previous" buttons at the top right and lower right of each section to move from one to the next" Out side of this note, remeber you can also you the browser "back" and "forward" buttons to retrace any page you have visited. This is a link from the older version of the report and the layout of those photos have been set by the format of the photo site (not mine). I doubt I will change much about it since I mostly link to the images individually. The site does have complete functionality including 3 sizes of photos, slideshows, etc. The maps were what I thought looked best at the time based on static screen shots of the maps. Now of course I use the live Google maps inside the photo frame and that's where I'm putting my efforts. Since there are more pictures on that site (I just included the cream of the crop so to speak) I need to leave the links in. Actually you can navigate on that site at the top of the page where there's a line on the right: "Gallery: Backcountry.Net Gallery navigate up Album: Papa Bear in the Great North Woods of New Hampshire" You click on the album title (after the word "Album" to go back. Also you could press the back button on the browser a zillion times Thank you! I have an idea here. 1) put links in the text which will bring up an appropriate photo from the list and 2) when a particular photo is showing, highlight the link in the text in some way. So a two way association. This will take a little though but it sound like a gretat idea. I didn't keep track logs in 2006, but now I do. On future topo maps they will be there. Here's an example from last month's trip to Maine. Station Rye (one of the Eastern Oblique Arc stations) involved a walk on old woods roads and a bushwhack. Here's my topo for that. click on the "Show Track" button in the top center to see the track: RYE Map. After turning it on and off, switch the map type (selector at upper right) to "Sat" (Satellite) and you will see the woods roads clearly where I walked. Just a reality check. Actually those satellite shots were what I studied ahead of time to decide on my route. Thank you again. I should be able to get a few of these ideas working in a day of so, so I post here when I do.

I just put up another version (same url). I now pre-fetch the next picture in any of the lists to get it in the browser cache. Used to be (due to bandwidth of browser issues) that when you clicked on a photo to get the next one, there would be a lag. First the caption would change and then (sometimes a second or more later) the image would change. It seems much better now. If you noticed this lag before, check now and see if it looks better. To test, clear your cache first. Here's the link again New Improved version

duplicate - deleted

I did a little work and I'll put up a new version. 1) I swapped the "Next" and "Previous" buttons. 2) I made the maps the same size as the pictures, for both small and large pictures. This is actually a much better way to do it. But I can't really do much about the fact that changing the picture to large size (or back to small size) changes the text flow, but now at least if you do, the map won't change it back. 3) I took out that picture of the lodge I stayed at. There a shot (a different shot) in the Thursday photos anyway. I'm thinking about how to pre-fetch the pictures. With some browsers, their performance is not great (without naming names, it rhymes with "Nicrosoft" ) and the effect of moving through the photos, whether manually or in the slide show is not cool when the new caption pops up, but the picture takes a second or two to follow behind. The other thing I could do is wait for the photo to load before changing the caption, but since javascript is asynchronous, I don't know how to do that at the momment. One thing that's nice (care of Google) is if you click on the Google logo on the lower left of the driving directions map, another widow will come up twith a big map and thye actual driving directions. So if someone wondered how to get to one of these places, it's all there. Here's the new version New version

Thanks for the comments. That's an idea I hadn't thought of. One reason to put both buttons on the far right of the window was so they could overlap the title of the section. But of course the two buttons could be reversed. The picture not changing on the click is sometimes delayed (due to bandwidth or browser caching) but should always happen. It should never stay on the same picture. The caption will sometimes change before the picture. Not sure what to do about that since it may look kludgy. Maybe pre-fetch the next photo somehow. HOWEVER, the little picture on the opening page (showing Tall Timbers Lodge) is not part of a list so clicking doesn't do anything (note the instruction about clicking under this one picture is different). All other photos are in lists. I may get rid of that small picture anyway since it's one-of-a-kind. Was that the photo you noticed not changing? If it was another one, I'd like to know about it. Repeated clicking should act just like a slideshow (with wrap-around) only manual. All pictures should be the same width, but some have different height (plus some are portrait mode). This may result in some text flow changing under the photo and associated links. This is intentional. I didn't want to waste space with a fixed sized table. The maps are also a different size which results in the same effect. I could always make the map <iframe> the same size as the picture but I was thinking about them separately and came up with a different "optimal" size. I could change this of course. It might look a little better. Then there is RE-SIZING. What is unusual is the re-sizing is done with a RIGHT-CLICK (as well as the slide show option) which is not frequently used for anything (except for stealing the picture via the context menu). I wanted two functions: 1) go to next picture in the list and 2) re-size, and I didn't want extra buttons, so I used left and right click. I may reverse them since the resizing is more normal than the moving through a list. The re-sizing is tricky. It's a toggle: small-to-large and next time large-to-small. Plus the slide show will go to large be default. I used to bring up a bigger picture in another window when you clicked. Now I bring it up in-line, which shifts the text around. This is intentional, although it may not be what people expect. On this I wasn't afraid to break with convention, although others may prefer buttons rather than clicking on the photo. Maybe I'll change my mind if there is universal opprobrium and go with buttons.

Looks good. I'm glad to see I turned Aroostook Co, ME a new color. BTW: I think the maps link to the wrong larger maps. The new updates little map seems to link to the large total count map and vice versa. As usual, a great service. Thanks! Edit: links fixed 9/3 Thanks

Hobby to Hobby to Hobby Like many of us, I came to this hobby from another and have now to a large extent integrated the two activities. Hiking: After retirement, I went back to my old love of hiking and spent a great deal of time on it, eventually hiking much of the northern section of the Appalachian Trail. In a natural metamorphosis, this hobby turned into a related one called by its adherents "Peakbagging". This means someone who climbs peaks, a natural outgrowth of my hiking. But more than just climbing them, it generally means pursuing a list of them. Does this sound familiar? Peakbagging: So I climbed the highest peaks in New England, and an assortment of other lists. Along the way I became aware of survey markers, at first because many peaks had such markers at their summits. Such was the transition to this hobby, Benchmark Hunting. Benchmark hunting: Sooner or later I found this site, and lo and behold, here were lots of folks doing this and furthermore they seemed to have the same Obsessive Compulsive need to find the most in a county, the oldest, the furthest north, the highest, etc. Wow, just like Peakbagging (or bird watching, another hobby of mine) But I digress, what about the reports as suggested by the title. My Reports: In all my hiking and Peakbagging, I was (still am) a prolific report writer. My home pages has dozens, nay hundreds of such reports. They follow a similar format and have a narrative emphasis, in other words they tell a story about this hike or that mountain. Those who like them say "I enjoyed your such-and-such report. I felt like I was there" (well, some one might have said that ). But this narrative, story telling format didn't seem appropriate for finding (or failing to find) survey markers. So I played with using maps and indexes and county lists, etc. but the result didn't excite me or my audience (which is a few loyal friends, my wife and maybe a few strangers ). Now I'm trying to consolidate my reports for all my interests into a common report format. My target audience is 1) fellow benchmark hunters, 2) fellow hikers/peakbaggers, and 3) friends and the occasional stranger who might find them on my web site. My design goals (subject to change) are 1) break long narratives into small sections, one for each peak, group of survey marks, etc. 2) consolidate the pictures and maps into an embedded "picture frame" in the story. generally one frame for each section. 3) introduce interactive Google maps, both mine and Google's driving directions in the frames. 4) provide means to leaf through the photos, make them bigger or smaller, start or stop a slide show, etc. - and do all this without disrupting the flow of the sections of the narrative. 5) provide links into the report so someone can link to a specific peak or specific survey marker form an external list I might provide. I've taken an old report from 2006 and redone it using the above design goals. Consider this a prototype. Here's the link: http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2h6gy/..._NH_Border.html Please bring it up, look at it, try to navigate through it, click on the photos, etc. etc. 1) is it obvious what you need to do to get through it? 2) are the methods for controlling the photos and maps clear? 3) are there any obvious glitches, typos, apparent errors? 4) would you rather things had been set up differently? how then? A word on the content: it's basically an old report reformatted. When I put together future reports I would endeavor to make a clearer distinction between hiking aspects and benchmark hunting aspects, but hopefully in such a way so I don't disrupt the narrative. Who knows - I may get some hikers interested in survey marks or some benchmark hunters interested in hiking. About links and indexes, here's a couple of sample links that illustrate that. Basically you are taken to a specific section of the report, and you can do what you like from there. Link to a Peak: http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2h6gy/...der.html#salmon Link to a PID: http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2h6gy/...der.html#QH0625 Check them out. And in case anyone is interested, here's the old version of the report: Old version. You'll find it's not much different content-wise, but is just one long rambling narrative. One more thing: the internet is not what it used to be. I used to put little thumb nail photos in and if you clicked on them you would get a bigger photo in another window. Now with the bandwidth available, I just put the photos in the way they look best (to me), or as someone once said "D*mn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!". But you can still make them larger or smaller - but no more tiny thumb nails. P.S. If you have some scathing criticisms and are too kind to put them here before the public, please email them to me. But better still put them here. I have thick skin.

Excuse me, but am I the only one who can't stop thinking of the Marx Brothers' Duck Soup, when I hear of Fredonia? One of the best of their corpus. And guess when that film was made? 1933. You 2oldfarts may be too old to follow directions, but you're just right to remember the Marx Brothers. I think they picked that town on purpose to confuse you serious searchers.