Destroyed, or is it?

[AZcachemeister]

Ok, today I went looking for a mark from 1899, which is OLD in these parts! (only two marks in Arizona are older)

So I make it to the top of the hill as the first to attempt recovery since 1921, and there is nothing left but the stem of the mark.

 

AUUUGGGHHHH!!

 

I REALLY, REALLY, REALLY, want to log a 'recovered in VERY poor condition', since there is still some evidence of where the mark is/was, but have been told (by a trusted friend) 'destroyed' is more appropriate.

 

What say the masses?

[Bill93]

If everything checks out right (coordinates match if they are adjusted values, the style of post looks right for the agency and age, description looks right after allowing for age, any reference marks were also researched, etc) so you are as certain as possible it is the right stem for the station disk, and not a reference mark or some other agency mark, then I would probably log it as "found poor".

 

I don't like how some people log a find on just anything they come across while searching the neighborhood, but I don't object to a well-researched "Found" without reading the number. I compare it to logging a "found" on a rivet or chiseled square. Those never did have numbers to read. I know this opinion is not universally shared, however.

 

It is a whole lot more important to record useful information about what is or is not there than to quibble over categorization.

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

What is the PID# and did you take any pictures for us to look over so we may be better informed to give you a proper answer?

 

John

[AZcachemeister]

DU2283

There is little or no chance of a mix-up on this!

Edited September 11, 2006 by AZcachemeister

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

If you found part of the stem then you should probably log it in poor condition since the horizontal 'location' is adjusted. They can go to this mark and use the center of the stem for the point.

 

Note: If the mark had been an elevation mark, then it would have been destroyed since the measurement is taken at the disk surface and losing most of the disk changes the elevation of the benchmark.

 

John

[+Black Dog Trackers]

AZcachemeister -

 

The diskless stem question is a tough question. The simple part of the answer is that Destroyed is definitely not what you should log. Since you really did do an actual search there, PostANote is probably not the right kind of log either. How to decide between Found and NotFound is where the problem lies. It basically comes down to two things:

 

1. The amount of experience and knowledge the person doing the benchmark search (you, in this case) has.

 

2. The amount of supporting evidence there is that the stem found is the remains of the proper disk.

 

As you can see from the nature of the above 2 things, the decision is going to be rather subjective.

 

A good rule of thumb about benchmark disks is that you must read the disk to see if what's stamped in it matches the Designation on the datasheet. It's a really really good rule when there is a disk to read. All too often, there is a disk, and it's the wrong one. Sometimes there's a disk, but you can't get to it to read it because of a fence or something, so the proper thing in such a case is to post a note. In your case, though, there's a diskless stem.

 

Why isn't it Destroyed? Deb at the NGS has given us guidance more than once that if the stem remains, it's better to report POOR than Not Found. Now, even if you're not going to make a report to the NGS, and will only make a log in GC.com, Deb's guidance is worth considering.

 

Unfortunately, the top of a mountain is often a place where there is more than one disk made by different agencies, and only one is the right one. Even worse, mountaintop stations are often triangulation stations that have reference marks. What if what you found is the stem of a reference mark? No good! So to analyze #2 above, you must imagine the worst-case-scenario: there were 3 marks set there, one by the USGS, one by the NGS, and one by the State, each having 2 reference marks, and all 9 disks have been broken off!

 

So, it comes down to a list of evidence based on what you found up there. Are there reference marks and did you do the proper measurements from them? Are the local landmarks still there and did you do the proper measurements from them? Does the disk stem and disk placement seem to be the right age? Does the immediate surroundings match what the datasheet says? What's the probability that what you found is not the remains of the right mark?

 

In geocaching the bias is toward Found because of the little counting thingie and in this case, all that hiking too.

Forget those things! Make the right subjective decision based on the evidence.

 

*** Now I see there have been 4 replies while I wrote this junk.

Time to press the button.

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

Pictures would tell a lot.

Some of us that have recovered some of the older marks could help by looking at the stem and setting.

 

Man Now I am more sure to get up there.

I have been there several times as a younger guy....but not as a benchmark/geocacher.

Now I will have to go back to one of my favorite spots.

 

There is some really cool gold mines in the area did you see them?

At the base of Sacaton are some Turquoise mines from the Moon Ranch Entrance.

 

I can tell you all about that neck of the GILA Wilderness.

I still have a fire fighters truck my 4X4 caching mobile now...when I can afford the gas.

 

Kings and Queens Crown is also a great climb.

 

edit woops wrong Sacaton.

I was talking about the one just east in New Mexico.

But there is no logable BM there.

Edited September 11, 2006 by GEO*Trailblazer 1

[Bill93]

Is there some history missing from the NGS data sheet on this one? I really doubt they set an aluminum disk in 1899, but that is in the description. Does anybody know when the first aluminum disks were set? Around here I only see them in the 1970's. Did the early aluminum disks have an aluminum shaft, or were they attached to a steel shaft? What material is the broken stem?

 

This station has ADJUSTED horizontal coordinates, so you should be able to set your handheld GPS to average a waypoint and come up within one least digit of the data sheet values for latitude and longitude. I see your values are that close. (I would have done it in dd.ddddd format for best resolution on my display and converted to dd mm ss.ss with a calculator to compare to the NGS data sheet values, but that's a nitpick).

 

What happened to the 10 ft rock cairn? If it is still nearby, then you have the wrong disk. If it is scattered around the broken stem, then it is more likely you have the right one. Somebody did a lot of work if they moved all those rocks.

[+Black Dog Trackers]

I was wondering the same thing about the aluminum. I know from coin collecting that the first aluminum coin is dated 1908. From chemistry, I learned that the Hall process is the method for getting Aluminum metal from aluminum oxide. I just looked up the Hall process in wikipedia and read that it was developed in 1886. I recall reading that, before the Hall process, aluminum metal was extremely expensive. The monumentation date is 1899. It is possible that the tablet is aluminum, although very unlikely.

 

What say the masses?

We say: show us the pictures!

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

It is possible that the tablet is aluminum, although very unlikely.

 

If you care to check the NGS database for Pinal County, AZ you will find that 8 out of the first 12 oldest (1899 & 1900) benchmarks are "Aluminum Tablets" & they had no RMs set.

 

It sounds like he found the correct spot and the remains (the stem) of the benchmark he was looking for.

 

AZcachemeister, congrats on finding (the remains of) one of the oldest in the county! Well done.

 

John

[Bill93]

I didn't know aluminum disks had been used that long ago.

 

You learn something every day (if you aren't careful).

[+Black Dog Trackers]

Wow, interesting!

 

Here are some of the other aluminum disk ones:

DU2278 Reported destroyed

DU2276

DU2287 Not found in 1963

DU2284 Destroyed in 1935

DA1585 Found in 1921

DU2086 Reset, possibly gone

 

The last one is often logged, but what is being logged is an undocumented 1965 reset. The interesting thing about it though, is that it says the aluminum disk that was there was unstamped. Aluminum is harder than brass or bronze and it would be quite difficult to stamp it in the field, I think.

 

An amusing item in the DU2086 datasheet is a mention of the sign: "MA PA AND THE BABY, TO CANYON KEEP LEFT".

 

DU2276 and DA1585 are possibly still there. Someone want to try to get a pic of them?

 

The question remains - is the stem found at DU2283 the stem of DU2283, or that of an undocumented (at NGS) disk?

[+Black Dog Trackers]

There is a found report but no pic at DU2269.

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

I have some Strawberry coins that date from 1880's to 1930's that were used to pay the Strawberry pickers with.

It is a little softer than the modern day aluminum(or alloy).

 

Being in Arizona and lots of mines nearby that produce it they may have been cast locally.

But that is just a guess right now.

 

adjust speeeling.

Edited September 12, 2006 by GEO*Trailblazer 1

[AZcachemeister]

Is there some history missing from the NGS data sheet on this one? I really doubt they set an aluminum disk in 1899, but that is in the description. Does anybody know when the first aluminum disks were set? Around here I only see them in the 1970's. Did the early aluminum disks have an aluminum shaft, or were they attached to a steel shaft? What material is the broken stem?

 

This station has ADJUSTED horizontal coordinates, so you should be able to set your handheld GPS to average a waypoint and come up within one least digit of the data sheet values for latitude and longitude. I see your values are that close. (I would have done it in dd.ddddd format for best resolution on my display and converted to dd mm ss.ss with a calculator to compare to the NGS data sheet values, but that's a nitpick).

 

What happened to the 10 ft rock cairn? If it is still nearby, then you have the wrong disk. If it is scattered around the broken stem, then it is more likely you have the right one. Somebody did a lot of work if they moved all those rocks.

 

I was thinking the same thing about Aluminum, in 1899. I figure it was fairly exotic back then, but worth the cost for surveyors who might have to carry a box full of markers around in the desert!

 

I did check the metal of the stem, and although I'm not a metallurgist, it is/was aluminum based.

 

There were many large rocks scattered around on the surface at the site, so the cairn was definitely knocked over to see what was underneath it.

 

So it seems by consensus, and with the blessings of the NGS, that this mark should be considered 'recovered in poor condition'.

 

As a side note, there is a mark in the Thunderbird Regional Park (northewest Phoenix) known as 'STEM' (DV1792), it's the broken stem of a mark by one agency, that was re-monumented by another agency.

 

I'm off to change my log from 'Destroyed' to 'Found', but I'm still hungry to find at least one of the 1899 series intact!

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

I found an aluminum cap.

Is this the Hall?

 

It appears there was(is) an aluminum top on Washington monument.

 

DaveD what is up there?

 

A Replica of the Aluminum Cap to the Washington Monument Located in Washington DC.

 

A History of the Aluminum Cap of the Washington Monument

 

added another page.

Edited September 12, 2006 by GEO*Trailblazer 1

[+Black Dog Trackers]

I did check the metal of the stem, and although I'm not a metallurgist, it is/was aluminum based.

This is an excellent confirmation of the find! No reference marks or other subsequent marks in the area (if any) would've been made with aluminum.

 

For getting a find of an intact one, I'd place my bet on DU2269 and I'd love to see a picture of it. It'd make a great addition to BuckBrooke's disk list too! DU2276 and DA1585 are other possibilities of these rare early aluminum disks. Tablet was a synonym for disk back then but who knows what they look like. They will likely not be stamped.

Edited September 12, 2006 by Black Dog Trackers

[CallawayMT]

I did check the metal of the stem, and although I'm not a metallurgist, it is/was aluminum based.

This is an excellent confirmation of the find! No reference marks or other subsequent marks in the area (if any) would've been made with aluminum.

 

For getting a find of an intact one, I'd place my bet on DU2269 and I'd love to see a picture of it. It'd make a great addition to BuckBrooke's disk list too! DU2276 and DA1585 are other possibilities of these rare early aluminum disks. Tablet was a synonym for disk back then but who knows what they look like. They will likely not be stamped.

 

Gentleman,

 

I believe the 1900 era Aluminim tablets are more common than you might think. Here is a photo of an 1898 or earlier aluminum tablet as shown by excerpts from the 1911 USGS Spirit Leveling book. This monument is from the Missoula Quadrangle; which you can see was found or set in 1898.

The USGS information:

 

 

CallawayMT

[lost02]

DU2276 and DA1585 are possibly still there. Someone want to try to get a pic of them?

 

No luck for us at DA1585.

[lost02]

DU2276 and DA1585 are possibly still there. Someone want to try to get a pic of them?

We recovered DU2276 yesterday.

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

DU2276 and DA1585 are possibly still there. Someone want to try to get a pic of them?

We recovered DU2276 yesterday.

 

GREAT JOB.

[lost02]

Thanks. We usually only get a chance to get out every other weekend, but we didn’t have anything to do last Sunday afternoon, and I had the coordinates in our GPSr, and it looked like a nice day, so we gave it a shot. We were really happy to find it after our trek up there.

[+Klemmer]

Very nice. I bet there might be a metalurgist or two around that would be interested in the picture of (probably) late 19th century aluminum with over a century of weathering on it, with minimal disturbances. Granted, not a LOT of weathering in that part of the country, but still interesting!

[+Black Dog Trackers]

Klemmer & TeddyBearMama -

 

Excellent point! That really is some old aluminum!

 

lost02 -

 

I love the views!

I already picked one yesterday.

[Papa-Bear-NYC]

After looking at the pictures of these old marks, I'm inclined to think that the old disk I recovered last June in Orono Maine, on a U. of Maine building, is also aluminum. We had some discussion on this disk, and DaveD found the USGS records and it too was set in 1900 (although marked "UNK" on the datasheet). Folks who follow these forums may recall a discussion on the initials at the bottom of the disk next to the "B.M.". The ones on the left are those of "J.W. Edgerly" who was the chief of the survey party.

 

PE0518

 

And here's the thread Thread on Orono disk

 

It is less beaten up than the station lost02 found, but it looks like the exact same disk type - and a long way from Arizona:

 

 

I always assumed it was brass, but looking at it again, it has none of the greenish-blue patina of old brass disks. It is in fact quite aluminum colored. Maybe the USGS used primarily aluminum disks in this era.

Edited October 31, 2006 by Papa-Bear-NYC

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

DU2276 and DA1585 are possibly still there. Someone want to try to get a pic of them?

We recovered DU2276 yesterday.

 

Congratulations on finding a benchmark disk that is 106 years old!

 

Well done,

 

John

[lost02]

Thanks all. We were a little disappointed with or search for DA1585, but DU2276 made up for it! We didn’t head out until 10:00, and got a few interesting looks from people in their 4x4’s, ATVs, and motorcycles as we were driving on the track roads with our Hyundai Accent. Eventually at 12:30 we hit a channel in the road that too big for our car to cross so we parked. We weren’t sure if we would have enough daylight to make it up to the top and back down again, but we started hiking anyway. The hike to the edge of the butte was rather uneventful and we managed it rather quickly. We decided to head up through the big rocks, which was a little challenging for us, but after a few rests along the way we managed to make it to the top around 2:30 without any damage to ourselves or equipment.

 

When we got to the top we headed for the coordinates and noticed a very small 1 foot pile of rocks, and pulled off the top rock to discover - a circular – lid of a glass jar. At first we thought it was a geocache, but from the contents it probably was some type of hikers log - we signed it anyway. We then proceeded to remove the last remaining rock from the pile, and this time we saw the disc - it was really rewarding to find it this time! We had two cameras with us and took a lot of pictures, and yeah, some of them really turned our nice. We had a snack, drank some water, then proceeded to rebuild the rock pile. We’re guessing the rocks helped “preserve” the disc from random hikers looking for souvenirs (by keeping it hidden), so we made sure there was an extra layer of rocks between the disc and the jar, and we made the pile a little higher than we found it though we didn’t try to make it 8 feet again! We headed down just North of the rocks which proved to be much easier for us and ended up getting home around 6:00 – all in all a pretty memorable recovery.

[Zurcher]

Dunno how to insert a pix..but if you check my pix LX3612 on top of Mowhawk moutain in CT...

its of a broken off stem. I loged it as a find. Dunno if BuckBrook [ who is she?...] will approove?

also....wondering if its possible to get hold of some official witness stakes....

many locations getting difficult to find BM's , after all, aren't we cachers doing uncle sam a favor and documenting stuff with pix. Might as well ID the location...??

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Dunno how to insert a pix..but if you check my pix LX3612 on top of Mowhawk moutain in CT...

its of a broken off stem. I loged it as a find. Dunno if BuckBrook [ who is she?...] will approove?

also....wondering if its possible to get hold of some official witness stakes....

many locations getting difficult to find BM's , after all, aren't we cachers doing uncle sam a favor and documenting stuff with pix. Might as well ID the location...??

 

I say you have a find. I'd log it found in poor condition since it is a triangulation station. If it were a vertical control mark I'd log it "found in probably destroyed condition".

 

Here is an explanation on how to insert pictures.

 

John