Mark Destroyed By Surveyor?

[+Klemmer]

A Second Order Triangulation Satation DX4252 which I had recovered previously has apparently been removed from the ground (destroyed) by a survey party. A steel fence post has been driven into the resulting hole, and an 8 foot length of PVC pipe has been slid over the fence post. My guess, based on similar ones I have seen in the area, is that it has been done for easier sighting at a distance. I have submitted a "Not Found" recovery report to the NGS.

 

Why would this be done? Is there a legitimate / allowable reason for a surveyor (even if it was Orange County that did it, who placed the original mark)? Just seems like such a waste. It is in a wilderness area, now actually belonging to the state. Not a lot of existing marks in the immediate area.

Edited January 30, 2006 by Klemmer & TeddyBearMama

[+GeckoGeek]

Is it destroyed or merely replaced by another marker? I ask because I've seen many logs where the original mark was replaced by a disk. So if one mark can replace another, then how is this "destroyed"?

[+Klemmer]

Well, my understanding is that if a disc is moved or in this case replaced by something much less precise, it must be considered destroyed. If a new disc were to be installed (monumented) in place of the old one, it would need to be resurveyed (reset?). Perhaps the surveyors here might enlighten us more. My real question is WHY?

[+Kewaneh & Shark]

The mark has obviously been tampered with, but I would doubt that a survey crew removed the mark. I would believe the possibility that a crew installed the pipe as a long distance backsight, of sorts, after finding the mark missing. There are, however, many methods of creating a semi-permanent backsight over an existing point without damaging, let alone removing, said point, so a surveyor would not have removed a mark for that purpose.

 

The removal could have happened any number of ways. Vandalism is one possibility. Heavy equipment is another possibility, and the first thing that came to my mind. You mentioned in your logs that on your first visit that you did not find RM#4 due to brush, but you found it on your return visit. What removed the brush to allow you to find it? In my area, it is not uncommon for large agricultural equipment to damage, and remove, benchmarks. Not just the marks from the settings, but the entire settings as well. It is also not uncommon to find marks 'protected' from equipment by tall pieces of PVC or steel pipe painted white. That sort of 'protection' is usually not installed by surveyors, but usually by the farming companies who understand what the marks represent. (In most cases, the guy driving the tractor doesn't know, or care, what a benchmark is, but a tall white pipe sticking out of the ground, that looks like a part of an irrigation system will get a wide berth.) This ag-land scenerio is probably not the case in a State owned wilderness area, but large equipment is used there too, and an 8 foot tall piece of PVC probably stands above the brush higher than a witness post that would have been installed by any surveyor. It would likely stand as a 'protection post' for not only the mark, but the RMs too.

 

The datasheet says that the mark is an NGS Benchmark, although it is/was set by the Orange County Surveyor's office. The stamping and original description indicate that. Given that the mark is the County's, they have the right to do what ever they want to with it, whether or not the mark has been incorporated into the NGS database. The mark belongs to the County, the NGS only distributes the associated data. There is a possibility that the County is in the process of maintaining and/or updating their survey network. That maintenence may include the repair and replacement of any marks. The fact that you found RM#3 & RM#4 still intact mean that replacement is possible, and that it could be every bit as accurate as the original. You can contact the County Surveyor's office and they be able to provide more information on this mark and it's condition. Asking for additional information from them may be a good idea prior to submiting a report to the NGS. They may have plans to replace it next week.

 

- Kewaneh

[+Klemmer]

K&S: Thanks for your educational insights, as always. Appreciate the feedback.

Just a couple clarifications from my end:

Brush clearance: normal winter brush die back in SoCal. Not human cleared.

Heavy equipment: No, I would have seen any tracks, cuts, etc. Brush several years old, or more. I wouldn't see any reason there to mark it like that to keep it from getting hit. Shouldn't be any reason. A very nice fire road is a safe 100 feet or so away, no need for road building. Cartainly no agriculture there.

Vandalism: I suppose vandalism is a possibility, but unless they had access to the wilderness area via several locked gates, it would have been a 4+ mile walk, with about a 1,000 ft elevation gain. Doesn't seem likely. There are lots closer ones to vandalize. It was there (pictures on GC.com) 2 years prior.

RM 4: I just didn't spend enough time bushwacking the first time I was up there.

 

By the way, went by there again in December and last Sunday, no changes. That's what reminded me to file the note from when I was there in September. One of my favorite areas for 6 - 10 mile hikes with 2000 - 3000 ft of elevation gain. We've placed 5 geocaches up in those hills.

 

I really think it was a survey party, possibly from Orange County. As you said, it's their mark, they can do what they want with it. Maybe they will re-set it someday.