Interesting disk recovery

[andylphoto]

I recovered two stations in the same vicinity Friday, both with adjusted coordinates. The marks in question are RL1589 and RL1587. I haven't posted logs for either, or logged either with the NGS yet, because of a question surrounding one of the disks, which is also referenced in the other datasheet.

 

Basically, the question is, did I *really* recover RL1589?

 

Both stations are on a hill, the former location of the Covington Lookout Tower. The tower has been removed, and that station (RL1585) was logged as destroyed by the NGS in 1975. RL1587, Triangulation Station COVINGTON, was also set nearby in 1975.

 

While the tower was taken down, the footings remain intact and above ground. The tower was obviously not very tall, as the footings for the legs are only about 6-7 feet apart at the base. This of course makes it quite easy to determine the center.

 

The datasheet for RL1589 describes it as a USGS disk set in a 4 inch square concrete monument, flush with the ground, 2 feet west of a metal witness post, and set under the previous center of the Covington Lookout Tower, stamped COVINGTON LOOKOUT 1951 R 1959. The datasheet for RL1587 describes the same stamping.

 

Now, this is exactly what I found when I got to the site, with the exception of the stamping. The disk monumented in a 4 inch square post, exactly in the center of the former lookout tower, is stamped COVINGTON LOOKOUT 1939 R 1951.

 

So it's interesting to me that the 1951 date is consistent, but...something's amiss. To me it looks like an error in somebody's handwritten notes or something, because there's a non-existent disk referenced in two datasheets. BOTH have a monumentation date of 1975, even though the USGS disk was obviously (by either stamping) set there back in the 50s. So what do y'all make of this, and what do I do with it?

[Bill93]

From the posted photo, that stamping could be 1959 with a stray scratch that confuses the 5 with a 3. Every part of the 5 seems to be there plus more. Now that is at the limit of pixel resolution in the posted photo and maybe in your original (unreduced resolution) it looks different. Or it could be a 3 if the font they used had a big serif on the 3. Have you found any certain 1930's disks in the area and compared the stamping font?

 

Either way, I can see how someone other than the person who stamped it might make a mistake in reading it. The 1951 looks more like the position on the disk I'd expect to be an original date, and if they re-used the disk they might stamp another date anywhere there was room.

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

A little adjustment by a photo enhancement program and it appears as though the date has been double stamped. Specifically the 5 has been stamped over the 3, which is leading to the confusion now.

 

 

I'd say you found the correct mark. It is not uncommon to see disks that have been stamped multiple times, some to the point that they can not be read any longer.

 

Claim your find for this one.

 

John

[andylphoto]

Here's a clearer version of the dates, taken from the original full res photo. The 5 and 3 are easy to confuse...I've done it before myself.

 

[Z15]

fyi

 

off base of the post a little

 

The USGS was in Baraga County (crews all over the UP for several years approx. 75-81) doing map updating, we drank a fee beers with the USGS crew chief in a bar in Gwinn once. NGS was also in the western UP area circa 1975. NGS recon guys came looking to borrow some equipment from us because some of theirs was delayed in transit. I recall 3 guys in a orange Chevy suburban driving all the way from MTU to Manitisque (we were surveying for new bridge on US-2) to talk with my crew chief. The college did not have a Geodimeter to loan them and neither did we.

 

I recall a story in the paper (DMG) back then about the USGS determining which was the highest point in the state as they leveled to the top of Mt Curwood and Mt Arvon and found they differed by a foot or so.

Edited August 28, 2007 by Z15

[Z15]

There are 2 USGS stations it would appear. The LOT itself which NGS reported destroyed in 1975 RL1585 and the USGS Bench Mark disk pictured.

 

USGS did this a lot. The horizontal party used the tower as the station but in 1951 a leveling party set a survey disk or the 1939 team set the disk and it was never leveled to till 1951 when the added that date to it. There are several other marks of similar story that I can think of. USGS often used Bench Mark disk for horizontal points. I think many times the left hand never new what the right hand was doing at USGS probably because they had so many crews and hired a lot of labor locally.

Edited August 27, 2007 by Z15

[+Holtie22]

It looks to me like you did indeed find RL1589 with a slight glitch in the stamping as John points out, but what about RL1587? Did you find that one? (18.050 meters west of the tower) It also has an RM 1 and an Azimuth Mark.

 

Editted to correct PIDs (had 'em backwards)

Edited August 27, 2007 by Holtie22

[+Black Dog Trackers]

andylphoto -

 

I agree that you have found RL1589, the disk pictured.

 

The disk is labeled a "BENCH MARK" and your magnified picture shows the original date of 1939. (A silly font, since the 3 looks too much like a 5.) I believe that it is a replacement (reset) disk since it has two dates (1939 and 1951), with the "R" meaning 'reset'.

 

Interestingly, the RL1589 PID is a horizontally adjusted mark. It may be that in 1975 the bench mark was re-used/re-established as a horizontal control mark, hence the "MONUMENTED 1975" in its history table even though it was also monumented as a vertical control mark in 1939. If this is true, then the timeline would be:

1939 USGS sets the disk as a vertical control (bench mark).

1951 USGS sees the 1939 disk destroyed or whatever and sets a new disk labeled 1939 R 1951

1975 USGS re-uses the 1951 disk for a horizontal control disk.

 

I recommend reporting to the NGS a find on RL1589 with a correction of its stamping to "1939 R 1951".

 

If you give the NGS a recovery note for RL1587, I recommend providing the same stamping correction to its description of the RL1589 disk "COVINGTON LOT USGS", which RL1587 is using as a reference mark. The RL1587 description of should also be fixed so that "COVINGTON LOT USGS" is changed to "COVINGTON LOOKOUT USGS 1975" for consistency.

 

Did you find RL1587's other reference mark, labeled "COVINGTON NO 1 1975", and did you find RL1587's azimuth mark?

[Papa-Bear-NYC]

andylphoto -

 

I agree that you have found RL1589, the disk pictured.

 

The disk is labeled a "BENCH MARK" and your magnified picture shows the original date of 1939. (A silly font, since the 3 looks too much like a 5.) I believe that it is a replacement (reset) disk since it has two dates (1939 and 1951), with the "R" meaning 'reset'.

 

I don't think you can infer anything from the fact that a USGS disk is stamped "BENCH MARK" My experience is that USGS disks often say "BENCH MARK" or "B.M." and also have a triangle in the center. I assume they just used multipurpose disks for both bench Marks or triangulation stations. I have never seen a USGS disk that said Triangulation Station or anything similar. USC&GS disks, on the other hand, say all kinds of things.

 

Here are two USGS triangulation stations, one from 1902, one from 1943:

 

QG1360 "MOXIE"

 

PF0943 "CARRIGAIN 2"

 

It would be interesting to hear from someone in the know (DaveD ?) what the USGS standards were for what was stamped on the disks they used.

 

Has anyone here got a photo of a USGS disk that does not say "B.M." or "BENCH MARK"? Or that says something else? Admittedly my sample is small?

Edited August 28, 2007 by Papa-Bear-NYC

[+Black Dog Trackers]

I don't think you can infer anything from the fact that a USGS disk is stamped "BENCH MARK"

---------

Has anyone here got a photo of a USGS disk that does not say "B.M." or "BENCH MARK"? Or that says something else? Admittedly my sample is small?

 

Yes, that's why I was saying "It may be that...blah blah blah". Basically I was theorizing about why the RL1589 mark says MONUMENTED 1975 in its datasheet. Either that date is in error and should be 1939 (or maybe 1951), or it is not in error because 1975 is when it was re-observed or reincarnated as a horizontal control. I was just theorizing of how it could be that the 1975 date is not an error somehow.

 

In BuckBrooke's agency list there are some USGS marks that don't say they are bench marks.

[Z15]

or it is not in error because 1975 is when it was re-observed or reincarnated as a horizontal control.

 

Bingo. Prior to this is may never have been horizontal control. Only the tower was, the disk was a bench mark and only had elevation determined for it by USGS. Thats my SWAG anyhoo. I think the disk was set in 1939 under the tower and in 1951 the level crew stamped R 1951 as a means of recovery. The 1951 is squeezed in there. I seen some strange things that could not be explained over the years. Like USGS marks that are in the NGS database because C&GS found them and used them but cannot be found in any of the USGS field notes.

 

I guess someone will have to get the USGS level notes for the quad but they may not be clear either.

 

This one more clear.

 

RL1605 DESIGNATION - IMP LAKE LOOKOUT TOWER USGS

.

.

.

.

RL1605 HISTORY - Date Condition Report By

RL1605 HISTORY - 1938 MONUMENTED USGS

RL1605 HISTORY - 1940 GOOD CGS

RL1605 HISTORY - 20000621 GOOD MIDT

RL1605

RL1605 STATION DESCRIPTION

RL1605

RL1605'DESCRIBED BY US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1938

RL1605'LOCATED IN NW 1/4 SEC. 16, T. 44 N., R. 38 W. STATION IS

RL1605'MARKED BY U.S.G.S. STANDARD TABLET STAMPED IMP LAKE 1938,

RL1605'SET IN CONCRETE POST AND CENTERED UNDER LOOKOUT TOWER.

RL1605

RL1605 STATION RECOVERY (1940)

RL1605

RL1605'RECOVERY NOTE BY COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY 1940 (KBJ)

RL1605'THE STATION IS A U.S. FOREST SERVICE LOOKOUT TOWER IN THE

RL1605'OTTAWA NATIONAL FOREST AND IS LOCATED ABOUT 7 MILES SOUTHEAST

RL1605'OF WATERSMEET AND 0.5 MILE SOUTH OF IMP LAKE. THE FINIAL

RL1605'AT THE CENTER OF THE LOOKOUT ROOF IS THE POINT SIGHTED UPON.

RL1605'THE STATION WAS NOT VISITED.

RL1605

RL1605 STATION RECOVERY (2000)

RL1605

RL1605'RECOVERY NOTE BY MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2000 (MPR)

RL1605'7 MI SE OF WATERSMEET, 1.6 MI S OF US-2, 0.5 S OF IMP LAKE IN OTTAWA

RL1605'NAT'S FOREST. FROM JUNCTION OF US-45, 5.45 MI SE TO IMP LAKE RD

RL1605'NO.3978, THENCE 1.6 MI S TO WOODS RD RIGHT, THENCE 0.2 MI W TO FORK,

RL1605'THENCE RIGHT 0.05 MI TO END OF RD. IT IS IN THE EXACT CENTER OF 4

RL1605'CONCRETE FOOTINGS OF OLD L.O.T., 1 FT E OF WITNESS POST AND FLUSH WITH

RL1605'GROUND.

Edited August 28, 2007 by Z15

[andylphoto]

It looks to me like you did indeed find RL1589 with a slight glitch in the stamping as John points out, but what about RL1587? Did you find that one? (18.050 meters west of the tower) It also has an RM 1 and an Azimuth Mark.

 

Editted to correct PIDs (had 'em backwards)

 

Thanks everyone for the input on this one. Yes, I did also recover RL1587. I had to do a bit of probing, as "flush" was now under a bit of soil and vegetation. http://www.geocaching.com/mark/details.aspx?PID=RL1587

[Z15]

I notice you say you did not find the Azi?

 

I think I found it a few years back, 1, 2 at the most. Its along a county road that is near a cometary it I recall. There is a VFW near there I drove past the cemetery one memorial day and I noticed a metal witness post at the edge of a field and near an old drive. I have to look to see if I took photos.

 

I do recall have a hard time uncovering it. Lots of rocks I think? I never went back to look for the station.

Edited September 3, 2007 by Z15

[andylphoto]

I notice you say you did not find the Azi?

 

I think I found it a few years back, 1, 2 at the most. Its along a county road that is near a cometary it I recall. There is a VFW near there I drove past the cemetery one memorial day and I noticed a metal witness post at the edge of a field and near an old drive. I have to look to see if I took photos.

 

I do recall have a hard time uncovering it. Lots of rocks I think? I never went back to look for the station.

 

I'd be interested if you had photos from this one. I did find the witness post about where it should have been. I had talked with the property owner for a bit after recovering the stations. He had seen me along the highway earlier, asked if I was going to look for the one down on the road, and pointed in the general direction. I told him that was my next stop, and told him it was related to the one on his property. He mentioned that the county had done some heavy grading of the ditches along the road this past spring, but he didn't know if the mark had been disturbed.

 

I was running out of time, so I didn't search very long. The witness post was standing about where I expected it to be, and didn't appear to have been disturbed. I looked around the WP and swept the metal detector in the area, but didn't turn up anything hopeful.

 

BTW, I wanted to thank you again for the wealth of local information! I enjoy reading your stories of mark recoveries, projects and encounters with the NGS and USGS around the Upper Peninsula.

[Z15]

I spent some time looking for the photos this pm but have not had any luck yet. Its not on my hard drive so it must be on a floppy and I have about 25+ of those with images. But I will keep looking as I find time.

Edited September 3, 2007 by Z15

[ArtMan]

I am trying to puzzle out a similar issue where the stamping on the disk doesn't match the description. I posted the details over in the Benchmark Hunting forum, if anyone's interested. TIA for your input.

 

-ArtMan-