Another question

[+89SC]

I was looking for JX0113 described as:

 

DESCRIBED BY COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY 1943 3.2 MI SW FROM GRAFTON. 3.2 MILES SOUTHWEST ALONG THE BALTIMORE AND OHIO RAIROAD FROM THE STATION AT GRAFTON, TAYLOR COUNTY, ACROSS THE TRACK FROM MILE POLE B-283-P 101, AT THE U.S. HIGHWAY 119 OVERPASS, IN THE SOUTHWEST END OF THE SOUTHEAST CONCRETE PIER, 14.0 FEET SOUTHEAST OF THE CENTERLINE OF THE SOUTHEAST TRACK, AND 3 FEET HIGHER THAN THE TRACK. A STANDARD DISK SET VERTICALLY.

 

It was placed there in 1943 and stamped Z 78. I found the bridge over Rt 119 had been replaced and there is nothing left of the old bridge. I decided to check out the abutments of the new bridge and found this:

 

 

It's now up at highway level instead of down at the tracks. Is there a way to find the PID of the new disk?

[ArtMan]

Hi, 89SC —

 

Easiest way to answer a question like this is to do a radial search on the NGS website. You plug in a set of coordinates and choose a radius, and it will return all the marks within your selected distance from the initial coordinates.

 

When I entered the (scaled) coordinates for JX0113, I got only two other marks within my selected 7/10 of a mile distance: JX0112 (WEBSTER) and JX0114 (A79).

 

The reset is an NGS disk, so it may eventually end up in the NGS database (sometimes this process takes a while). Since it was not in the NGS database in ca. 2001, when the Geocaching.com snapshot was taken, obviously it will not be in the Geocaching database either.

 

The benchmark database used at Geocaching.com has never been updated to reflect changes in the NGS database in the last six years or so, and although there have been some mumblings about a possible update, I think most of us do not consider this a very likely occurrence, though we would be happy to be proven wrong.

 

-ArtMan-

[+89SC]

Thanks ArtMan. I've seen your logs in WV. Rowlesburg, Kingwood, and Keyser are some of the places I remember seeing them.

[+Klemmer]

89SC:

Nothing will stop you from post your picture of the reset disc on the JX0113 geocaching webpage, and emphasizing that this is NOT the disc described, and should NOT be logged as a find. I try to do that in situations like this.

 

One of the more common errors we see on geocaching's benchmark pages is a reset being logged as as the described benchmark.

 

So - kudos for picking up on the difference! Keep up the good work.

 

Klemmer

[+89SC]

I marked the old disk as destroyed and posted that I found the reset at geocaching. I didn't post a picture. I think I will.

[ArtMan]

Picture is a good idea, as is mentioning in your log something like that while the old mark is destroyed, it has been replaced ("reset") by the disk shown in the picture. That way, you help educate others and perhaps prevent the next person from making an erroneous log.

 

-ArtMan-

[+PFF]

Excellent catch, and a great piece of detective work!

 

I've found two of these. FA5164 near Lenoir NC is an example of how I logged the new disk under the original PID.

 

-Paul-

[+2/3 Marine]

Paul,

 

I found the reset for JK0300

logged it as a note with GC, didn't think to tell the NGS as I thought it needed it's own PID#. Did I miss

out on doing more than I did? I know I should have taken an area picture, gotten better coords ( it was

easy to find) and given a better description, but this was not the correct disk for the PID. So... I pretty

much blew it off!

[Wintertime]

I've found two of these. FA5164 near Lenoir NC is an example of how I logged the new disk under the original PID.

Paul, I'm confused about the recovery report you filed with NGS. Both your NGS and Gc.com reports say that you found FA5164, but how can that be? You say that "The station has been moved"? Is it not the case that one station (FA5164) was destroyed and a new one (no PID assigned) was created? Or can stations really be moved?

 

Also, why would 7A1 RESET be a replacement for 7 ATA?

 

Whenever the subject of resets has come up on this forum previously, I thought we had consensus that a reset is not the original station and therefore can't be logged as FOUND on Gc.com or GOOD with NGS--even when it's in exactly the same location. All the more so when it isn't!

 

I absolutely agree with the idea of mentioning the reset on the Geocaching.com page for the original mark (especially when the reset doesn't have a PID of its own), to let people know that there is a newer disk. I could even maybe see mentioning the reset in passing in a MARK NOT FOUND report for the original mark. But I'm very confused about the idea of saying that that station has been found. It goes against everything I've read here over the past few years. Help!

 

Patty

[+PFF]

I found the reset for JK0300

logged it as a note with GC, didn't think to tell the NGS as I thought it needed it's own PID#. Did I miss

out on doing more than I did?

 

As others have pointed out, finding the RESET is not the same as finding the original station. The tendency here in North Carolina is that the RESET eventually is given a PID. (But as ArtMan mentioned, this can take a long time--like several years.)

 

Also, why would 7A1 RESET be a replacement for 7 ATA?

 

Hi, Patty. The NCGS records clearly refer to the mark as "7 ATA RESET". Now, if I marked it as GOOD at NGS, then I hit the wrong radio button. I intended for it to be POOR to reflect the fact that the attributes had changed.

 

I logged this primarily to establish some history until such time as NCGS assigns a PID and uploads a full description and coordinates. My thinking is that if a surveyor is working a nearby job and needs a tie point, he/she has a little more of the story than a simple "Not Found". In such cases, it is common for surveyors to call NCGS to get the precise coordinates. Meanwhile, when the new PID is assigned, the old PID will be marked "destroyed" and my update will disappear from the database.

 

-Paul-

[Wintertime]

Also, why would 7A1 RESET be a replacement for 7 ATA?

Hi, Patty. The NCGS records clearly refer to the mark as "7 ATA RESET".

So you were working off some North Carolina state records that mentioned 7 ATA RESET? The NGS datasheet for FA5164 says the stamping was "7 ATA 1948." So was there a 7 ATA RESET, then a 7A1, and now a 7A1 RESET 1993? They changed the designation from 7 ATA to 7A1, but they consider it the same station?

 

Now, if I marked it as GOOD at NGS, then I hit the wrong radio button. I intended for it to be POOR to reflect the fact that the attributes had changed.

Yeah, the datasheet says "HISTORY - 20070916 GOOD GEOCAC." But even if you had clicked MARK NOT FOUND, wouldn't it still be the case that station FA5164 was destroyed by construction, not moved?

 

I logged this primarily to establish some history until such time as NCGS assigns a PID and uploads a full description and coordinates. My thinking is that if a surveyor is working a nearby job and needs a tie point, he/she has a little more of the story than a simple "Not Found".

Oh yeah, as I mentioned before, I agree that it can be useful to mention the existence of a reset. I just don't see how that reset can be considered the same station. Am I misunderstanding the definition of "station"?

 

Patty

[+PFF]

Station: 7 ATA RESET

 

NAD 83/86: LATITUDE = LONGITUDE =

SPC 83/86: NORTHING = Meters EASTING = Meters

 

NAD 27: LATITUDE = LONGITUDE =

SPC 27: NORTH(Y) = Feet EAST(X) = Feet

 

NAD27 CONVERGENCE (ø) = NAD27 SCALE FACTOR =

ELEVATION (NGVD 29) USE GEOID03 GEOID PROGRAM

389.812 meters (BM) TO COMPUTE GEOID HEIGHT

PID =

 

STATION IS LOCATED ABOUT 9.3 MI (15.0 KM) NORTHEAST OF

LENOIR. $ ALONG NC 18 FOR 4.1 MI (6.6 KM) SOUTHWEST FROM THE

WILKES-LENOIR COUNTY LINE, AT KINGS CREEK SCHOOL, ACROSS FROM

THE MAIN SCHOOL ENTRANCE.

 

Hi, Patty,

 

Above, I have reproduced the "7 ATA RESET" record from NCGS. It came with a set of reference objects and distances, and the disk was found at the precise point indicated.

 

The record I have in my hand makes no mention of the stamping on the disk, which, as you probably noticed, differs from the original datasheet in several regards--including the words "KINGS CREEK SCHOOL". It may be that NCGS intends to rename the station when it assigns a PID. Or it may be a stamping error by the Field Party.

 

This document appears to give a very precise elevation, but no coordinates. There are several "ADJUSTED LOCATION" disks in the area, so the primary purpose of this station might be for elevation. Apparently something was significant about this location because the NCGS felt the need to put a new disk in place (at considerable expense) when the other one was destroyed. The new disk is approximately 125-150 feet from the old disk's mounting spot.

 

Other than that, I don't have any theories. Nor will I comment further because this clearly is beyond my level of expertise! On my next trip to the NCGS office, I'll ask a few questions. Until then, it is what it is.

 

Meanwhile, any LOCSUR working in the area will know in advance that the original station is gone, and that there is a replacement. Hopefully, such knowledge will be useful to professionals.

 

-Paul-

[Wintertime]

Hi, Patty,

 

Above, I have reproduced the "7 ATA RESET" record from NCGS. It came with a set of reference objects and distances, and the disk was found at the precise point indicated.

Hey, Paul, I just looked at your photos on Geocaching.com, and you did in fact post a photo of 7 ATA RESET, which matches the NCGS's database for the replacement to FA5164. But the report you filed with the NGS was for 7A1, so probably you just slightly mistyped the PID when you were submitting a found report for 7A1, wherever that is.

 

I still hope that one of the pros will check in here with information on whether a reset is considered the same station. If so, then I'll stop getting on the case of folks who claim a find when they come across a reset instead of the disk mentioned in the NGS datasheet!

 

Patty

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Hi PFF,

 

I think you need to see just what your log is (and I am including BOLD to the area you need to see).

 

the following update has been submitted to NGS:

 

THE STATION HAS BEEN MOVED, DUE TO EXPANSION OF THE SCHOOL PARKING LOT. THE PUBLISHED COORDINATES ARE NO LONGER VALID. A NEW DESCRIPTION FOLLOWS.

 

THE STATION IS LOCATED ALONG NC-18 ABOUT 9.3 MILES NORTHEAST OF LENOIR, AND 4.1 MILES SOUTHWEST FROM THE WILKES-LENOIR COUNTY LINE. THE MARK IS ABOUT 10 FEET HIGHER THAN THE HIGHWAY AND IS FLUSH WITH THE GROUND. THE DISK IS STAMPED 7A1 RESET 1993 KINGS CREEK SCHOOL.

 

 

But, as you can plainly see in your picture of the reset disk, it is 7 ATA as stated on the GC.com benchmark page. So besides the other error of being a 'FIND' instead of a note, you also made a typo on GC.com and I have not checked the NGS data sheet to see if you copied and pasted that error onto your NGS Recovery Report.

 

I have another question, can GEOCAC submit a 'NOTE' as a recovery to the NGS also? I would think that would be a better solution than a any type of a 'FIND' log since it has been moved that distance and not replaced into the exact position of the old mark. I agree with Patty. it does bother my sense of what we have learned here in the forums also.

 

Shirley~

[+PFF]

Gosh! You all have convinced me I am nothing but a klutz. Sorry to have bothered you, but happy to have provided some entertainment for the group. And thanks, so much, Shirley, for continuing to pick apart the submission. (Since you like bold print, I'll use a little, myself.)

 

And no, there is not a "NOTE" choice on the NGS database, at least when GEOCAC is entering info via computer. Nor can we do "destroyed" entries. Those require a higher level of access.

 

Everyone knows that there are thousands of professional submissions with errors, such as destroyed marks which are logged as "FOUND", typos, mis-spellings, reversal of Left and Right or North and South, and slipped decimals. (Check the box score for FA1889 and compare it with the reference mark distances in the text.) So it's difficult to understand why you have come down so hard on me. To whit:

 

So besides the other error of being a 'FIND' instead of a note, you also made a typo on GC.com.....I think you need to see just what your log is (and I am including BOLD to the area you need to see).

 

I saw the typo when it was published, but I don't know what you would have expected me to do about it--then, or now. I don't have the ability to edit entries. That means I had to weigh the cost vs benefit of asking a very busy NGS staff to fix what I regard as a minor error.

 

In the list of "sins" which you so helpfully enumerated, I discount the importance of any perceived errors on geocaching.com. This is a hobby site. We all hope to be accurate, but a FOUND vs any other entry classification is trivial. As for "scoring", don't go there. My life is not measured by the number of benchmarks I've found. I've seen what "contesting" has done to the marriages of my ham radio buddies, and I'm not about to start chasing numbers and logging FOUNDs simply to increase statistics.

 

So, that leaves the issue of the NGS database. Here was a case where a mark was moved because of construction. I was told where to find the reset, and I did. I submitted an updated recovery report. Now, professional surveyors won't waste time looking for the original mark. Instead, they know that a reset exists, and where to find it. In my opinion, the NGS entry is appropriate.

 

Yes, there is a typo regarding the stamping. I literally spend hours compiling the reports off-line in an effort to get everything ship-shape. In spite of spell-checking software and reading the numbers over and over, an occasional error slips through. So, shoot me! Or banish me from this website. It would save a lot of time to simply send recoveries to NGS (under the INDV agency code), without taking additional time to resize and upload photos and text to geocaching.com.

 

Or, just lighten up, and let's all go back to having fun with a hobby which also has public service aspects.

[Wintertime]

Paul, I can't speak for Shirley (although I suspect that she's on the same wavelength), but it was certainly not my intent to imply, "Ha ha, you made a mistake." I am sincerely trying to understand the definition of a "station" and when it ceases to be one. I did not know that you had mistyped the stamping on the disk, and thought at first that you were referring to another disk that had been placed after 7 ATA RESET. Then I thought that you had entered information for 7A1 under the wrong PID. From your latest posting, I gather that it was 7 ATA RESET all the time, and you just mistyped the stamping in your NGS report. C'est la vie! No problemo!

 

So it's great that we got that sorted out, but I still hope that one of the pros will respond to 89SC's original posting and clarify for us whether a reset is considered the same station or not. That's all I'm trying to figure out! If I ever implied anything else, I'm sorry.

 

Patty

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Paul, don't get so excited. What the ladies were referring to wasn't a simple error on the name of the disk. They were referring to the fact that many folks here in this forum have gotten bent because people have logged resets as the station marks and called them "found" in "good condition". Now it is up to you to edit your GC log to a note or a DNF since you clearly found a "RESET" of that mark and did not find the described station disk.

 

How you choose to log with the NGS is strictly up to you, but at least it would be nice if you followed the current accepted standard on GC.com of logging a DNF for a disk that is clearly reset and not listed with its own PID or clearly stated in the Official Recoveries that it is now a disk stamped reset.

 

If you prefer we can post links to many of the threads where this has been discussed over and over.

 

Perhaps an apology to the ladies would be in order, now.

 

John

[CallawayMT]

If I might interject into this thread. First off, I think that the majority of the serious geocaching benchmarkers that frequent this forum do well above average work on their recovery reports, some even get way above average; that being said everybody is supposed to be having fun here and we all do it in our own ways.

 

I don't think anybody was trying to ridicule you for your recovery report PFF, I think Winter and Shirley were just trying to make sure they understand how these types of reports are handled or seen by the NGS or surveyors.

 

I do not speak for the NGS, but I am a surveyor who does use these monuments on a regular basis and I will tell you what my opinion in this matter is. As I know it, we are dealing with marks that have been destroyed or will be destroyed at some point, the NGS or other agency would like to retain this mark's usefulness in the same general area and so they set a new mark. At this point this new mark has no relation to the old station or PID, other than it was intended to replace the doomed mark. From an NGS data sheet I would be interested in knowing if a mark is not found and if it is presumed lost with a bridge that has been demolished. If a new mark has been set in the area and does have a PID I would like to know that it has been recovered and I know that I can now use the new mark.

 

IF, as I have seen and suspect on this mark, based on the 2001 date, there is no PID available, then I don't have a data sheet. Let me clarify that poor sentence structure; after 6 years, I believe that this mark probably fell through the crack and probably will not make it into the NGS database; so I cannot use it because I do not have the adjusted data to go with it. So in this area you have a PID with no mark and a mark with no PID, neither one will do me any good. It does seem that in this area, based on PFF's statements that the NCNGS may actually have the data, but has not taken the time to submit it to NGS. So in that case, I could possibly receive the data information from the NCNGS and with verification to adjacent stations use this mark.

 

Anybody confused yet? To answer Winter's question, no these are not the same station. To PFF, yes we do all make mistakes, but don't be offended when questions come up about those mistakes. SC, you sure have been keeping us busy with all of your questions. Keep them coming, we all enjoy this hobby for our own reasons.

 

CallawayMT

[+PFF]

It does seem that in this area, based on PFF's statements that the NCNGS may actually have the data, but has not taken the time to submit it to NGS. So in that case, I could possibly receive the data information from the NCNGS and with verification to adjacent stations use this mark.

 

Hi, CallawayMT:

 

Yes, you could get the information! NCGS maintains a very good set of files for benchmarks. Some of it is online. In other cases, you can make a phone call and get complete information about a mark.

 

Every surveyor in our state knows this. The head of NCGS is a key player at the Licensing Board. NCGS publishes regular newsletters, with tech tips and news items, which is sent to every surveyor in the state. Hence, surveyors know whom to call. If they want to know the particulars about a new or reset station, the information is easy to obtain.

 

Telephone calls are answered by a real person. There is no "voice-mail Hell". The receptionist will patch you through to one of the NCGS engineers, or to the NGS person who is assigned to the NCGS office. I know the system works because I often run across fresh survey stakes at marks stamped 2000 to 2007. Folks are using the new stations. Having very close ties to the surveying profession (including one firm which has been in business since 1886), I also hear the positive comments about how simple it is to pick up the phone or send an E-mail and get a response from NCGS. And I'm sure you can appreciate this: When coordinates are obtained, they're already in SPC format!

 

Since I've never heard anyone else from geocaching.com mention an on-line database operated by their state's geodetic office, I assume such resources are uncommon. However, our state's information access can be compared to what some of our members have experienced when requesting info about USGS benchmarks; i.e., Make a phone call. You get what you need. There is an excellent flow of information.

 

There's not a "brick wall" between users and the benchmark data. Professionals are not limited only to what they can see in the NGS system--at least in North Carolina, and hopefully in other states. But what they see in the database can point them to information which they can use.

 

Regards,

-Paul-

[+PFF]

Perhaps an apology to the ladies would be in order, now.

 

I'll apologize for making such a strong response. It now is obvious that Patty and others quickly realized that there was a typo in the datasheet. Shirley did not pick up on this, and her post was the "straw that broke the camel's back". I'm all for peer review, but I felt like the whole football team had fallen on top of me.

 

I also should have kept in mind that Shirley's focus is 100% geocaching.com, with no submissions to NGS or interaction with your state's geodetic survey office. And that's okay. She now is aware that there are category differences between the hobby site and the NGS database.

 

Frankly, my irritation was not with what she said. What triggered the strong response was how she said it. And unnecessary repetition does not help. Perhaps folks don't realize that before sending a reply to a thread, you can scroll down below the editing box and see if there have been any posts made during the time you were creating. If so, you can (if needed) delete or edit what you were going to upload. I'm confident that if Shirley had seen Patty's post from a few minutes earlier, her comments would have been different.

 

-Paul-

Edited November 26, 2007 by PFF

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Perhaps an apology to the ladies would be in order, now.

 

I'll apologize for making such a strong response. It now is obvious that Patty and others quickly realized that there was a typo in the datasheet. Shirley did not pick up on this, and her post was the "straw that broke the camel's back". I'm all for peer review, but I felt like the whole football team had fallen on top of me.

 

 

-Paul-

 

Sorry Paul, but the typo was in Your GC log and not the datasheet. You typed 7A1 in your log and NOT 7 ATA (which is the datasheet designation). Your picture clearly showed 7ATA on the disk and that is what caused the resulting post to be made. I'm sorry you didn't understand what they were trying to get across to you, perhaps you were just too tired from a hard days benchmarking.

 

You do realize that it is possible to go back and change your GC,com log to a DNF or a Note, don't you?

 

We all strive for accuracy and when we make a mistake we appreciate it when people let us know so we can get it corrected. That is all that was going on with your log, sorry you didn't see it that way.

 

John

 

PS: the whole football team consisted of Patty & Shirley, That's the kind of football team I'd like to jump all over me, an all woman team!

[Wintertime]

Since I've never heard anyone else from geocaching.com mention an on-line database operated by their state's geodetic office, I assume such resources are uncommon.

Zhanna has links to online databases for cities, counties, and states. I see that she has listings for almost every state, although sometimes there's only information for selected cities and counties, not statewide as you have in North Carolina.

 

CallawayMT, thank you for your thoughts on the nature of station-ness. They jibe with the definitions I've been using (based on previous discussions in this forum), so I'll continue with those policies when logging to Gc.com (which I do rarely these days) and NGS.

 

Patty