Is it necessary to find the "secondary benchmarks"?

[+Ronancello]

If I have only found the main benchmark, and could not locate secondary marks (azimuth, reference marks), is it OK to still log a "Found It"? (Provided I explain my results.)

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

If I have only found the main benchmark, and could not locate secondary marks (azimuth, reference marks), is it OK to still log a "Found It"? (Provided I explain my results.)

 

Welcome to Benchmark Hunting Forums.

 

Sure, it is perfectly OK to log. The Surveyor that might look at the log would see that Station itself is still there and in what shape. Then if you explain your results, all the other benchmark hunters that might try to find it and any reference marks would know up-front what to expect.

 

Good hunting.

 

Shirley~

[+Ernmark]

..but if you're into solving a puzzle - it's a lot of fun to look for the other marks! You get to put long unused brain cells in action calling up math/geometry & trying to figure out 50-year old descriptions. Often the Reference Marks are pretty close and can be flushed out...then there's the Azimuth Marks - often a 1/2 mile away! I found one that was over 5 miles from the main station! If you think it might be fun, try to look for a whole set...but be careful - you might get hooked on a new aspect of geocaching !

[Papa-Bear-NYC]

If I have only found the main benchmark, and could not locate secondary marks (azimuth, reference marks), is it OK to still log a "Found It"? (Provided I explain my results.)

Hi Ronancello

 

If you scan through a typical popular benchmark log on Geocaching.com you will see the opposite problem: more than a few "finders" have found a reference mark, not the main station map. Lots of folks see a disk, any disk, and exclaim "Wow: I found it!". Sadly the real station mark may have been under where they were standing and was never noticed.

 

Best advice, find everything you can, but don't log a FOUND unless the main station disk was one of the ones you found. If you find one or more reference marks but not the station mark, log a NOTE and explain what you found and your opinion on why the station mark was missing ("A new parking lot appears to be where the station should be", "the cliff edge seems to have eroded away", etc.) And remember, a picture is worth a thousand words.

Edited April 10, 2008 by Papa-Bear-NYC

[+seventhings]

If you are sure that the thing you found is, in fact, the thing with the PID (that is, the thing that is described in the datasheet), then it is perfectly OK to log it, even if you did not find the "secondary" marks (reference marks and azimuth mark). However, you should take care that the disk you found is the primary station, and not one of the reference marks. It is very common for inexperienced and/or careless benchmark hunters to find a reference mark and log it as if it were the main station.

 

Sometimes, the reference marks and/or the azimuth mark also have their own PIDs and datasheets, and can be logged as well.

 

Typically, when an experienced benchmark hunter finds a station that has reference marks and an azimuth mark (and those secondary marks DO NOT have their own PIDs), the hunter will make some effort to find and document those marks, and include photos of them in the log. Experienced benchmark hunters love to log something like: "Found the station as described. Found RM1 22.6 feet north-nothwest of the station. Found RM2 45.0 feet south of the station. Found the AZ 0.55 miles southeast of the station and at handheld coordinates Nxx-xx.xxx W0xx-xx.xxx."

 

Marks that have reference and/or azimuth marks associated with them typically have ADJUSTED (very precise) horizontal coordinates, so there is no value in including the mark's handheld coordinates in the log. Usually, the reference marks are nearby (within 10 to 100 feet - the true bearings and distances are included in the "boxscore" portion of the NGS version of the station's datashet), so there is little value in including the handheld coordinates for the reference marks in the log (although many of us will do it if the reference mark is greater than, say, 50 feet from the main station.

 

Azimuth marks are another matter, however. They are typically 0.25 - 1.00 miles from the station, and are often very difficult to find (assuming they don't have their own PID and coordinates). The NGS datasheet provides a true bearing to the azimuth mark, but not a distance. When I find an azimuth mark, I always include the handheld coordinates. This makes it orders of magnitude easier for the next user to find the AZ.

 

Will

Edited April 10, 2008 by seventhings

[+PFF]

Azimuth marks are another matter, however. They are typically 0.25 - 1.00 miles from the station, and are often very difficult to find (assuming they don't have their own PID and coordinates).

 

Here's a tip I discovered recently. Look at the "box score" for the main station and see if the Az Mark once had a PID. If so, search for that specific PID on the NGS site. If you get a notice that the mark has been removed from the data base, look carefully at the bottom of the notice. You sometimes can see the original degrees, minutes, and seconds. This can give you a reference point from which to begin looking. I've found this to be more valuable than knowing the "approximate" distance from the station.

 

-Paul-

[+seventhings]

PFF - Excellent tip!!

Thanks,

Will

[+seventhings]

PFF - Excellent tip!!

Thanks,

Will

[holograph]

Just a piece of off-topic trivia I came across the other day. We've often discussed why azimuth marks are always about a mile or so from the station mark, and there have been a number of explanations: it needs to be far enough so that a precise measure can be made, and so on.

 

I was reading a book on surveying from about 1910, and the author stated a very simple and practical reason -- the azimuth mark should be about that far away so that the telescope doesn't have to be refocused to sight on it.