Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
Black Dog Trackers

USGS is interested in getting recovery reports

Recommended Posts

NGS has a free program to convert 27 to 83 datum.

 

NADCON

 

Transforms geographic coordinates between the NAD 27, Old Hawaiian, Puerto Rico, or Alaska Island datums and NAD 83 values. Can be used for America

I always use this one: Datum Converter

 

It's a simple input form. Input or output can be in D.ddd, DM.mmm, DMS.sss or UTM and it also has NAD27 Canada as a datum.

Share this post


Link to post

I know I know- you guys are thinking "what, ANOTHER question from this guy - sheesh - we haven't even figured the usgs sheets out yet" but I have to ask. The sheets I got were 1956 marks...... are there older ones around me do you think? and is there a way to tell - without searching forever, what the oldest ngs or usgs mark are in my area?

 

I'd be willing to bet that all most of the USGS marks in a given area (quad) will be from the same year or two. They were out there getting data for a map, and when the needed marks were surveyed, they moved on to the next area (quad).

Share this post


Link to post

Went out and searched another mark.

 

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WM279C

 

Here is what I am wondering now.

 

1) were ref. marks really meant to last? I hunted several rr spikes in the base of telephone poles. I am pretty sure those poles are long gone. Any thoughts?

 

2) I looked for a chisled square on a RR trestle abutment. Was that moveable? Just sitting there? I didn't find the one I was looking for......................

 

3) I see many references to "private rd" are those a) what we now call driveways? or :( gas company roads etc?

 

Fo the record - I still feel somewhat lost reading the map and sheets povided to me - as the lines shown run into one another - are unclear etc etc etc etc. (even if I have found a few of the marks.................................)

Share this post


Link to post

Went out and searched another mark.

 

http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WM279C

 

Here is what I am wondering now.

 

1) were ref. marks really meant to last? I hunted several rr spikes in the base of telephone poles. I am pretty sure those poles are long gone. Any thoughts?

 

2) I looked for a chisled square on a RR trestle abutment. Was that moveable? Just sitting there? I didn't find the one I was looking for......................

 

3) I see many references to "private rd" are those a) what we now call driveways? or :P gas company roads etc?

 

Fo the record - I still feel somewhat lost reading the map and sheets povided to me - as the lines shown run into one another - are unclear etc etc etc etc. (even if I have found a few of the marks.................................)

 

1. For a time,they were mainly temporary.

 

2.I have found many of them and yes many are gone.

Chisled squares are really hard to find due to wear over the years but with a good eye and the right shadow you can see them and some are still really good.

They are actually chisled into the cement or stone.

 

3. Yes,Yes.

 

Edit forgot.

Join the club I can't read those sheets either.

But I can find em and it looks like you can too.

 

Thant's what counts in the end.

Edited by GEO*Trailblazer 1

Share this post


Link to post

I got my USGS datasheets on Friday evening and spent the majority of the daylight hours this weekend hunting for the USGS marks in the Lebanon County, PA quad.

 

I was disappointed in my success rate--just 7 out of 20 were found. This compares with about 15/20 for NGS marks. My initial impression is that the USGS marks are not set with the same view to the future that NGS marks were. They are typically closer to roads, often 12-15 feet, and often set at road intersections where lanes were added/widened, etc.

 

Also, the descriptions are subject to interpretation--"x feet from the T-intersection" was the most widely used description, and while I interpreted it as being from the center of the two roads at the intersection, it was often difficult to determine where the midpoint was, and there were often changes to the intersection that made it even harder to figure out. After that the normal second measurement was from the centerline of the closest road. I was often reduced to walking up and down the roadway with my metal detector in hand, sweeping a huge area. In every case I failed. The only marks I found were visible as soon as I got to the indicated area, and I didn't need to measure.

 

As for reference marks, they proved even more elusive. I didn't have any "spiked in trees" ones on my sheets--mine were all chiseled squares, but I was upset at how many seemed to be done. I found just two, but failed to find some of them that should have still existed but the concrete was spalling, or perhaps the description was so vague I was looking in the wrong spot--"the middle of the south headwall of a bridge" leaves a lot of room for interpretation! I expect chiseled squares to be there even after 60, or 100 years, if they are in a good location and were done correctly. I have found many that were over 100 years old, and only in extenuating circumstances should they be gone--such as the structure being gone, or excessive spalling of the rock or concrete.

 

Frex3vw, based on the photos in the waymark, I think your chisel mark should still be there but it may be hard to see. Based on the two I found this weekend I would say it would be more towards the center of the top of the wingwall rather than at the corner (which is fairly typical of some surveyors, especially on the Reading Railroad). They often seem to be about 2 inches by 1.5 inches or so, but there is no standard size that I know of.

 

Private roads are just what you said--some sort of access to a private residence or company. They are usually NOT standard driveways leading to a suburban garage, but are longer access roads to farms, etc. It is possible that they may have become public roads due to suburban sprawl.

 

As for reading the descriptions and maps, I admit that they seem confusing but there is some sense of it all. I had previously purchased all the topo maps of my area so when I got the Lebanon quad I was able to get the four 7.5 minute maps and start marking the bench marks on them. I was luck in that all but 2 of the ones I looked for were already on the maps, indicated with an X and the elevation. This provided a good check that I was looking in the right spot. For the two that weren't already there I measured on the map and found the most likely spot. Once I got in the field it turned out I was correct on both counts.

 

The sketch map that comes with the control sheet is a very rough drawing of the area but I was able to trace it on my topo maps by following the roads. The level lines are less clear than NGS level lines, which generally follow a single road. The USGS lines sort of meander across roads at times.

 

Overall it was both a frustrating and interesting weekend. I only have about 10 more marks to look for in that quad so it is time to ask for others in my area.

Share this post


Link to post

Mloser - Sorry you didn't find more of the ones you looked for - but i would be appreciative if you would post a pic of the chisled squares you found - I would love to go back and look at the rr abutment I searched a few days ago - but I must admit I am just not sure what to look for - and am still not sure I understand if they were simply placed there as a stand alone piece etc. If they are carved into the structure - then what am I looking for?

 

Congrats on your finds! Please post the waymark link when you log em so I can check em out.

 

This USGS thing sure is an adventure eh?!

Share this post


Link to post

Careful using DATUM CONVERTER. The algorithm used is called a Molodensky transformation and can easily have errors in the U.S. of 5-10meters whereas NADCON has an uncertainty of approximately 15 cm. The Molodensky transformation is also the one used in almost every hand-held receiver on the market.

Share this post


Link to post

Frex3vw

 

The chiseled square would be actually incised into the material--stone or concrete. I didn't take any pics of the ones I found this weekend but searched my old logs for some examples. Here is one in concrete. It is at the corner, making it more of a chiseled L. Another one is basically a chiseled U, and is against the side of the concrete foundation. I can't find any pics of squares that are completely within the top of the foundation, although one I found yesterday definitely was.

 

Note that although they are hard to see on the pictures, both of the ones I found were pretty to see. The pics just don't show them well.

 

If I wasn't out of marks to hunt in my local area I wouldn't be bothering with these USGS ones! They are too depressing. Maybe a different quad will give better results. I have asked for 3 more.

Share this post


Link to post

Here are two different ones to look at. Both in 'RR ABUTMENTS'....

 

FS0764 - CHISELED SQUARE 2 and FS0759 - CHISELED SQUARE 3

 

The second link has several different finders with good pictures of the surrounding area.

 

We benchmark hunters like pictures...they are lots better than words...at least for me...

 

Shirley~

Share this post


Link to post

frex3wv -

 

A chiseled square can be a challenge to see. Here is an example of a full chiseled square. Here is another like the first one shown by mloser - it's not really a square, but instead an angle near a corner. Then there's this debacle. I crossed that street about 5 or 6 times trying to figure why such a weird mark would be on one side of it, while the datasheet says it was on the other side. As PapaBear says, we still may not have found the right marrk.

 

If it's a sunny day, bring a mirror. It may help you to get sufficient critical lighting to see a faded chiseled square.

Edited by Black Dog Trackers

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks to the 3 posters above - I now know what a chisled square is. I must admit - I feel like a dummy. I thought I was looking for a stone (similar to the one my coco benchmark find was in). Eeesh! After reading the posts I went back out to the train trestle benchmark I found a few days ago - brough a broom etc etc and still found nothing (though I did notice - in the area I believe the ref. mark to be that the abutment was damaged - ie: corner broken off).

 

I have to say I am abit confused. Why would reference marks be so temporary? I found the disk with ZERO help from any reference mark. I am also not sure how they were used in any calculations - as there is no way - even at the time they were set - that there was any line of sight etc.

 

Does anyone here think there is a "telephone" pole still standing and in use after 51 years?

 

Lastly - I noticed a new abbreviation on my sheets - anyone have any idea what: W.L. = -11.6 ft" means??????

Share this post


Link to post
Lastly - I noticed a new abbreviation on my sheets - anyone have any idea what: W.L. = -11.6 ft" means??????
Context would be helpful. Water Line? Working Level? (A couple of possibilities from AcronymFinder.com)

 

-ArtMan-

Share this post


Link to post

responding to artman:

 

I am sorry to say I reallly can't offer any. I CAN tell you this - the theme seems to be that this line is below the description of the disk or ref. mark and is on a line all its own - and you may be on to something - for it appears in train trestle/box culvert type marks. On some though its not provided at all. Even so - what in the heck could it mean - and why would it be there at all? (again - I go back to my question of forward thinking or lackthereof - even though these guys were really smart!)

Share this post


Link to post

W.L. Could refer to water level. It there a stream, lake or other body of water nearby?

 

Keep in mind USGS was mapping, so those notes help the mapper relate topography.

 

Could be the water level in the ditch or stream was 11.6 ft below the elevation of the bench mark, reference mark etc. Taking a SWAG here, you often have to read the notes in totality to figure lots of this out.

 

usgs1.jpg

Edited by Z15

Share this post


Link to post

I suppose it could have to do with water level 0 but still - whats the purpose of a reading that could change with a rain an hour later. I noticed on the sheet you have and posted that there are even times listed - whats up with that?

 

Is there actually someone in the USGS who really knows all the answers to our questions? If so - I sure wish they would hop on here and participate and take the guess work out. Its not like these sheets are from the 1700's!

Share this post


Link to post
I noticed on the sheet you have and posted that there are even times listed - whats up with that?
Just a quick look at the sheet, but it seems most (all?) the times are associated with water levels or conditions. Makes sense. These were mappers. Water levels (hydrogpahic features) could sure be important.

Share this post


Link to post

As a Measurement Technician we always had to make a note of time,temperature,barometric pressure and many other things at "THE TIME OF" the reading and Calibration Test.

 

Temperature has a great effect on the tension of a steel tape when drawn tight.

 

If it was raining I am sure they did not have all that hi tech equiptment set up and running.

 

Just some notes to ponder upon.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Does anyone here think there is a "telephone" pole still standing and in use after 51 years?

 

 

Well, don't count on it, but it's certainly possible. RL0013 is described as being 15 feet east southeast of a telephone pole. Mind you, I found the station before I found the pole, but there it is. 59 years after the last recovery!

 

Oh...you said standing AND in use. Well, do I get partial credit? :o

 

bce4d0b8-4bd9-4b24-b585-c429a83c074d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

very cool find Andy. Did you find the trees described too? So..... I guess I shouldn't give up on searching for telephone poles - but if they are right next to the road - well - I am still abit sceptical those would be there... but you never know!

Share this post


Link to post

Those poles seem to last a LONG time. I am certain I have found some that date to the 1960s, intact with the original markings on them as described, and exactly the same distance from the mark as the description. It seems to me that when poles are replaced the new pole is placed beside the old one in a new hole, then the wires switched and the old pole removed. This, I assume, prevents too much strain on the wires from having to stretch across two pole lengths.

Share this post


Link to post

Does anyone here think there is a "telephone" pole still standing and in use after 51 years?

 

How about a telephone pole from pre-1934 and still standing although not being used at this time. Some of the other marks in this line reference this line of poles. Many are still standing, but we haven't been able to find some of the benchmarks. The poles are there, but the described road has gone missing!

 

We referenced it in our log for GQ0040.

 

John

Share this post


Link to post

BDT,

 

I was having some troubles but found it was on my end.

If you download to desktop and then move the program to my documents ot won't work it comes up with 0.

 

I redid it and it has been working fine since.

Share this post


Link to post

Does anyone here think there is a "telephone" pole still standing and in use after 51 years?

 

How about a telephone pole from pre-1934 and still standing although not being used at this time. Some of the other marks in this line reference this line of poles. Many are still standing, but we haven't been able to find some of the benchmarks. The poles are there, but the described road has gone missing!

 

We referenced it in our log for GQ0040.

 

John

 

Hee hee hee. One of the fun landmarks to guide people past is the Telephone Pole Forest in Chester, NJ. (Not far from LY5790 Bell) A former Bell Labs facility. (I think the county park service has acquired it.) When Alcatel merged with whatever Baby Bell that owned this, it became superfluous. I remember visiting here in the 50s wth my father (who worked for Bell Labs for 48 years.) There was also an ocean and a ship, for testing underwater cables. My father was an enginer on the first trans-Atlantic cable from Nova Scotia to Oban, Scotland. Mid-50s. And, mid-50s he brought me there on a Saturday for some business purpose.

Rows and rows of telephone poles planted to see how well various treatments worked. Fifty years later, they're still doing well. They don't seem to have grown much, but they're still there!

Share this post


Link to post

I was recently able to answer one of my original questions about USGS marks. There are at least 41,299 of them in the NGS database. I looked (with unix's grep program) at all the datasheets by state, picking out the MONUMENTED line and then counting the frequency by agency. (I realize that this MONUMENTED line isn't totally reliable as it has at least a couple of different concepts mixed together.) Here are the top 10 lines of the file:

 

CGS 380,339

NGS 74,872

USGS 41,299

NCGS 22,673

MNDT 12,598

FLDT 8,992

DOD 7,347

SCGS 7,316

USE 6,526

NOS 6,191

 

I put the rest of the lines of the file here.

 

Since this topic got me interested in which marks are on topographic quads, I did a similar thing with counting PIDs on topo maps and was surprised by some really high numbers. Here are the top 10 lines of that file:

 

1	FL	CAPE CANAVERAL (1976)	 688
2	DC	WASHINGTON WEST (1983)	611
3	CA	NAPA (1980)			   582
4	WA	POVERTY BAY (1994)		509
5	CA	LONG BEACH (1981)		 480
6	FL	ST PETERSBURG (1987)	  449
7	CA	HOLLYWOOD (1994)		  409
8	OR	PORTLAND (1990)		   388
9	CA	POINT MUGU (1967)		 371
10   FL	CLEARWATER (1987)		 366

The entire file is 51,658 records long, but I put the first 100 lines here (down to 191 PIDs per quad).

 

(Other such statistical things are listed on the main page.)

 

In the same interest, I added new filters in ngsread, one for monumenting agency, and one for topographic quad. I also added a labeling variable to label marks by the monumenting agency.

 

Back to the main subject here, the index the USGS supplied to frex3wv included 79 marks. I believe that all 79 of these marks are disk ("tablet") marks, not the copper nail or spike or chiseled square type of marks. Evidence of that is that the index only lists one mark (231 SKS 1956 652) on page 9, the USGS page that GEOTrailblazer1 posted for frex3wv. That is the only disk mark among the 7 marks listed on that page.

 

The USGS mark index covers the 15-minute Clendenin quad. This quad was later divided into four 7.5-minute quads; Blue Creek, Clendenin, Quick, and Mammoth. The NGS database has 39 marks included in these four 7.5 minute quads. However, only 3 of the 39 are the same marks as on the USGS index of 79 marks. These are: Blue Creek, W 7, and 618. (Strangely, the NGS database includes 4 USGS marks here, but only one of them is included in the USGS index for Clendenin quad. The other 3 are PUTNEY, BIG KNOB, and 644.)

 

So the ratio (for this sample of one 15-minute quad) of USGS index marks that are included in the NGS database is 3/79 or 4%.

Share this post


Link to post
Since this topic got me interested in which marks are on topographic quads, I did a similar thing with counting PIDs on topo maps and was surprised by some really high numbers. Here are the top 10 lines of that file:

 

1	FL	CAPE CANAVERAL (1976)	 688
2	DC	WASHINGTON WEST (1983)	611
[rest omitted]

Cape Canaveral doesn't surprise me, and neither does Washington West, where I live, and which includes the Capitol and White House. Those two together have about 85 marks in the buildings and on the grounds, the equivalent of 500 per square mile!

 

Needless to say, the vast majority of these marks are inaccessible to casual benchmarkers.

 

-ArtMan-

Share this post


Link to post

Back to the main subject here, the index the USGS supplied to frex3wv included 79 marks. I believe that all 79 of these marks are disk ("tablet") marks, not the copper nail or spike or chiseled square type of marks. Evidence of that is that the index only lists one mark (231 SKS 1956 652) on page 9, the USGS page that GEOTrailblazer1 posted for frex3wv. That is the only disk mark among the 7 marks listed on that page.

 

The USGS mark index covers the 15-minute Clendenin quad. This quad was later divided into four 7.5-minute quads; Blue Creek, Clendenin, Quick, and Mammoth. The NGS database has 39 marks included in these four 7.5 minute quads. However, only 3 of the 39 are the same marks as on the USGS index of 79 marks. These are: Blue Creek, W 7, and 618. (Strangely, the NGS database includes 4 USGS marks here, but only one of them is included in the USGS index for Clendenin quad. The other 3 are PUTNEY, BIG KNOB, and 644.)

 

So the ratio (for this sample of one 15-minute quad) of USGS index marks that are included in the NGS database is 3/79 or 4%.

BDT

The USGS index is headed "Index of Permanent Marks", a euphemism for disks. "Useful Elevations" are not listed. This particular index however, is only for vertical control, so stations like Putney and Big Knob would not be included. When ordering from USGS, one needs to specify that both vertical and horizontal control are needed.

Share this post


Link to post

ok - well I can't say I follow everything - but I do try! I planned on calling and asking for the remainder of the quad sheets I haven't received yet, but am wondering now: Did I ask for the right thing - is Holtie22's post telling me I should be asking for more - or am I on track? Help! This vert./horz. loses me.

Share this post


Link to post

ok - well I can't say I follow everything - but I do try! I planned on calling and asking for the remainder of the quad sheets I haven't received yet, but am wondering now: Did I ask for the right thing - is Holtie22's post telling me I should be asking for more - or am I on track? Help! This vert./horz. loses me.

Here's an example from Zhanna's website where she has posted USGS control data for selected areas. You will note that there are separate listings, by quadrangle, for third order leveling (vertical control) and third order horizontal control (triangulation).

 

The horizontal marks are actually easier to find, since their locations are adjusted. Although, you do need to convert the lat-long coords from NAD27 to NAD83 before you can use them.

 

At any rate if you want ALL of the USGS data for a particular quad, you need to specify both horizontal and vertical control in your request. When you say "benchmark", they are thinking vertical control only, even though in this community we use the term "benchmark" generically to refer to both vertical and horizontal.

Share this post


Link to post

This particular index however, is only for vertical control, so stations like Putney and Big Knob would not be included. When ordering from USGS, one needs to specify that both vertical and horizontal control are needed.

Ah, interesting, I see now, thank you, Holtie22 ! <_<

Share this post


Link to post

Hey guys.

 

Well I called and asked for the rest of the quad sheets for the area I have been hunting in locally. The fellow I speak to is Keith - and he was asking how things were going. I told him what sorts of things we were trying to figure out from the sheets already provided.

 

I told him that obviously the ref. marks were the most challenging to find after all these years - and he was not suprised at all. He said that the sorts of things put in trees were expected to be enveloped years down the road. So no big suprise on not locating those without a metal detector.

 

He offered to try and help figuring out the sheets - how they were written, abbreviations etc. All we need to do is email him. He said there were a few field guys still kicking around and that they may be able to fill in the blanks also. I have his email address for future use if the need should arise here. Anyone have a list of questions from these threads they may want to write him about?

 

Lastly, I mentioned getting both vert. and horz. as y'all suggested. I am not sure if he is sending both as we got sidetracked in conversation, however he did mention that the vert. ones would be much more plentiful then the horz. ones.

 

Just an update.........

Share this post


Link to post

Howdy guys!

 

I know I've been away from the forums for a while, but rest assured I am still hunting benchmarks like crazy whenever I have the time. I just checked in today to see what's been going on and I came across this thread. I'm glad to see that there's some interest in USGS marks and recoveries. I've been using their datasheets for a few years now and I really enjoy the challenge. :P I also have been submitting recoveries to them, but I was never quite sure how useful they really were. I'm very glad to read that our recoveries are being accepted with open arms.

 

I'd like to put out a call to all those who have requested USGS datasheets for their local quads. I have more than enough space, and I would be happy to host these datasheets on my own website, adding to the (small) collection I have so far. Is anyone interested? If so, please contact me here or via e-mail, and we can set something up.

 

Thanks!

 

~Zhanna

Share this post


Link to post

frex3wv -

 

That would be excellent if you could get a list of questions from us and do the emails. I will think of some later tonight and post 'em here. Hopefully you can get the horizontal index too so we can finish fleshing out a system for us to use in getting the total information. There may be other puzzles involved with the horizontal marks.

 

Zhanna -

 

Wow what a great offer. How many 15-minute maps are there, heh heh? Anyway, it would really be an excellent thing to have a place for everyone to put these indexes and lists of USGS marks! You have some already for the site, I take it.

Share this post


Link to post

Zhanna -

 

Wow what a great offer. How many 15-minute maps are there, heh heh? Anyway, it would really be an excellent thing to have a place for everyone to put these indexes and lists of USGS marks! You have some already for the site, I take it.

 

I'm willing to host them, no problem. If people are able to create PDFs and send them to me that would be quickest (for me), of course. But if that's not possible, I'm certainly also willing to accept photocopies through the mail and scan them myself (or make my work-study students do it ... he-he :P ).

 

I have some datasheets available on my site already, but so far they only represent some areas of PA, CA, AZ, NY/NJ, and ME. http://surveymarks.planetzhanna.com/USGS/USGS_PA.shtml

 

~Zhanna

Share this post


Link to post

I got a few pages.

I will try to see if I can get them to PDF format.

 

Most of the one's I have recovered,Benchmarks are now Waymarks.

 

The others like chisled squares,copper spikes,RR spikes,Copper Washers embedded in trees.

A few stones and I will have to go over the list again.

 

I also got alot of images of these,but may want to update them with better images.

 

So sometime soon you will be hearing from me.

Share this post


Link to post

BDT: I look forward to the questions you and others have developed here over the last few weeks - I'll pass them along once y'all have posted em.

 

I DID ask for both vert and horz - am curious to see how much i'll receive.

 

Zhanna: It would be great if you read the entire thread - then share any wisdom you may have to help us......

Share this post


Link to post

frex3wv -

 

Here's some questions that come to mind at the moment:

  1. If we ask for a name of a 7.5 minute quad, could the USGS translate that name into the parent 15-minute quad name and then give the index, drawing, and mark location information for it. The reason I ask is that it's easy for us to refer to names of 7.5 minute quads, but we have no index of 15-minute quads, their names, or their locations.
  2. Is there any way to divide up the index and pages into 7.5 minute quads, or should we just go ahead and expect to be geting information by 15-minute quad only?
  3. What do the numbers on the drawn map mean and how can we use them to help us find the USGS marks?
  4. When we call or write for the pages, drawing, and index for both horizontal control marks and vertical control marks for a particular topo map, what is the standard wording we should use in such a request?
  5. Does the USGS want reports from us on any mark, including the nails and spikes, or just the "permanent marks"?

Edited today to get a number for the fifth question. - bdt

Edited by Black Dog Trackers

Share this post


Link to post

USGS Index

 

The first page is 1x2 degree.

The next is the 30x60 Series.

The next is the 7.5 quads.

 

In the Top right hand corner of the TOPO is a Name and set of Numbers for that quad,that is what you ask for.

The 7.5 Quad.

 

It would be cool if we could add the chisled squares and spikes that can be seen as far as the others it is hard to prove just what is in the tree.

 

You will find that the defanitions will lead to elevation marks on the topo's with no X.

 

I use the TOPO's to get close and start looking from there.

 

Once you reach the map you will get the info.

 

MAP LINK FULL DESCRIPTION

MO A CASSVILLE

MAP LINK PART#

MO A CASSVILL010

SE CORNER LAT/LONG 36deg37min / 093deg45min

USGS REFERENCE CODE 36093-F7-TF-024

USGS File# TMO0186

VERSION YEAR 1999

SCALE 24K / 7.5' x 7.5'

TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOUR INTERVAL TCI: 20F

COUNTY Barry County

BORDERS

100K/250K REFERENCE MO C TABLE ROCK LAKE

MISC. INFORMATION

CATEGORY w

PRICE $ 6.00

AVAILABLE QTY IN STOCK

 

See Topo Map Symbols Guide

Share this post


Link to post

BDT:

 

Did the post above answer your questions - or do I still need to zip an email out?

 

Anyone else have any questions to ask my contact at USGS?

Share this post


Link to post

I got a few pages.

I will try to see if I can get them to PDF format.

 

 

OK, but if you can't, just snail-mail them to me and I will do it. (E-mail me if you need my mailing address.)

 

~Zhanna

Share this post


Link to post

 

Zhanna: It would be great if you read the entire thread - then share any wisdom you may have to help us......

 

I'm workin' on it ... :laughing:

 

~Zhanna

Share this post


Link to post

A couple of weeks ago I contacted USGS and asked if they had an electronic index (shapefile, etc) of the old discontinued 15 minute (1:62,500) map series for the U.S. They responded that they do not.

 

I am working on a way to develop such an index and hope to be able to make it available in the next couple of weeks. It would show the 15 minute series geographic extents and names along with the current 7.5 minute quads covering the same area.

Share this post


Link to post

The 15-minute series quad maps were apparently discontinued around 1950. There were printed, and possibly microform indexes, but nothing that I've found online.

 

I stumbled onto the West Virginia Geological Survey, which has a topographic map viewer, an online GIS application that has layers for both 7.5- and 15-minute topo maps, but I would be surprised if very many more states had something like this.

 

I checked the National Atlas, which has a layer for 7.5-minute maps, but not for the historical 15-minute ones.

 

-ArtMan-

Share this post


Link to post

BDT:Did the post above answer your questions - or do I still need to zip an email out?

No, it didn't. I could see the USGS Index addressed my first question, but the USGS Index doesn't have any 15-minute layer. ArtMan's reference to the WV Geological Survey definitely does answer that question, but only for West Virginia. (I noticed my last question, $5, had no number so I edited my post just to put in that number.) The other questions were not answered IMHO.

 

tosborn - Wow, that would be really great!

 

Zhanna - I think not many of us have paid the $$ to get a PDF-maker; all we have is the PDF reader. I have heard of some freeware PDF makers. I have never tried any, but it seems like that option would be better than snail mail and then you having to do the PDF-making. (It looks like the Clendenin quad information would be over 50 pages and that's just for the vertical control marks.)

Share this post


Link to post
think not many of us have paid the $$ to get a PDF-maker; all we have is the PDF reader. I have heard of some freeware PDF makers.
There are a number of free online services where you upload a file and it does the conversion, then mails you a link to the PDF. I use PDF Online, which accepts .doc, .rtf, and various image formats, among others. (I have only used the .doc converter, and don't know how it handles .gif or .jpg; it may not be able to aggregate numerous images into one PDF.)

 

Another alternative would be to use the open source and increasingly popular OpenOffice.org suite, which has a PDF converter built in. I have generated numerous PDFs using OOo, including some that are mainly or exclusively images. Great program, and the price — FREE — should be well within anyone's budget. The latest version, for Windows, Linux, Mac and other platforms, is available for download here.

 

Disclosure: just a satisfied customer of both PDF Online and OpenOffice.org.

 

-ArtMan-

Share this post


Link to post

 

Disclosure: just a satisfied customer of both PDF Online and OpenOffice.org.

 

-ArtMan-

 

I haven't used PDF Online, but I definitely can recommend OpenOffice.org! I use it at home and actually prefer it, at least for simpler projects, to the resource hog that is Adobe Acrobat.

 

BDT: snail-mail is just fine, of course.

 

~Zhanna

Share this post


Link to post

The 15-minute series quad maps were apparently discontinued around 1950. There were printed, and possibly microform indexes, but nothing that I've found online.

 

I stumbled onto the West Virginia Geological Survey, which has a topographic map viewer, an online GIS application that has layers for both 7.5- and 15-minute topo maps, but I would be surprised if very many more states had something like this.

 

I checked the National Atlas, which has a layer for 7.5-minute maps, but not for the historical 15-minute ones.

 

-ArtMan-

 

The Oregon Geospacial Enterprise Office has many resources available including a download of 15' quads for the state. Unfortunately it is in a file format (E00 file) that I do not have the ability to access.

 

The University of Oregon Map Library has a list of the 15' Quads available for Oregon, and what is in the library holdings by quad name but sadly no online resource.

Edited by TheBeanTeam

Share this post


Link to post

A couple of weeks ago I contacted USGS and asked if they had an electronic index (shapefile, etc) of the old discontinued 15 minute (1:62,500) map series for the U.S. They responded that they do not.

 

I am working on a way to develop such an index and hope to be able to make it available in the next couple of weeks. It would show the 15 minute series geographic extents and names along with the current 7.5 minute quads covering the same area.

 

If you can do this for the entire U.S., it would be extremely helpful (and I will be eternally grateful)!

 

~Zhanna

Share this post


Link to post

I scrubbed down the CA on-line topo source (CASIL) pretty good, but got zip on the 15-min topos in terms of an index. I even looked at one of the 30 X 60 min topos from there (BIG!), to see if maybe they annotated the 15-min ones an the margins - nope. At least not LA.

 

I have everything Delorme put out for USGS quads for CA, and I'll check tonight if at some larger scale they went to the 15-min instead of edge-butting 7.5-min, but I doubt it....

 

EDIT: I think the problem is solved for California (??). Using this "mapsurfer interface " it looks like you can step down thru each of the series (c, f, o series). I THINK the f series are the 15-min ones. Right?

Edited by Klemmer & TeddyBearMama

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

×
×
  • Create New...