Can't Log MY0307--What's Up?

[+pgrig]

I haven't encountered this problem before.

 

I printed out the NGS Data Sheet for MY0307 through the Scaredy Cat viewer, went out, and found it (it's D 33, from 1965). When I try to bring it up under GEOCAC, it says it can't find a benchmark with that PID. Now what do I do?

 

The mark shows on Scaredy Cat (SE) of Lowell, MA, at the junction of Rt 3A and Rt. 129, correctly.

 

Did the GEOCAC import function just screw up on this one, leaving me to log it only through NGS?

[+Black Dog Trackers]

pgrig -

 

The Geocaching benchmark database is a snapshot of the NGS database around 2000. Marks monumented both before 2000 and after 2000 have been added to the NGS database since then. There was no screwup of the import, it is just that it was done 8 years ago from an ever-changing database.

[Wintertime]

Just curious about something in your recovery report for MY2370, "Pgrig."

 

MY2370'PLEASE SEE PGRIG'S GEOCAC ENTRY OF 2/4/08 FOR BM AND AREA PHOTOS AND

MY2370'SUPPLEMENTAL LOCATING INFORMATION.

 

When you say "See Pgrig's GEOCAC entry," do you mean your log on Geocaching.com? "GEOCAC" is the agency code for geocachers on the NGS website, but I can't think of where else on that website you would have been able to post photos and supplemental information. If you are referring to Geocaching.com, is the NGS okay with us referring surveyors to another website for information? I hope that Gc.com is still around decades from now, but I'm not sure I'd want to count on it.

 

Patty

[+pgrig]

Thanks, Black Dog Trackers. Sorry I used the term "screw up" . What I meant to say was that I thought there had been an error in the NGS-to-Geocaching.com import process, since during my first 125 Geocaching.com reports, MY0307 was the first station I had ever encountered that produced a report from NGS but did not have a Geocaching.com entry. Guess I was just lucky with the first 125. I understand the "snapshot" concept, but I had thought that a PID from 1965 would have been swept up in the import. I don't believe I had ever gone to the NGS database directly before doing so through the Scaredy Cat viewer (which I also just learned to use); I did all my searches and data sheet requests through Geocaching.com.

______________________

 

Patty:

 

I have only been recovering these marks for five months, so I don't know what NGS is OK with. I believe you do, however, since I believe you're a pro!

 

I'm not sure, but I think you somehow pulled up the very first report I ever logged with NGS. If I'm not supposed to refer back to my (more extensive and photo-documented) Geocaching.com entries, I won't do that! It just seemed to me that my Geocaching.com entries, and particularly their area photos, were more useful to other users than the (more abbreviated) ones on NGS. I work hard on these reports and on the accompanying photos.

 

I just finished making a series of NGS reports on my 30 or so first finds (all of which were for PIDs not previously reported via Geocaching.com or not reported as found to NGS for over 20 years or so), and I don't believe I made any more "cross-references" to our website in these reports, so if this is inappropriate, I think my mis-steps were minimal. I tried to read over the Geocaching.com and NGS FAQ pages beforehand, but if I missed something, please just re-direct me.

 

I also thought "GEOCAC" was just a shorthand way of referring to Geocaching.com's benchmarking section. Sorry for the mistake.

 

-Paul

 

P.S., Patty:

 

1. Is there a way I can pull up all the NGS reports I (as "PG") have made?

 

2. I'm not clear on what I'm supposed to do to report a mark to NGS as "destroyed". I made my first 3 or 4 of these reports by filling out the on-line form with the "not recovered; not found" box checked, some notes added in the text box, and an email sent to Deb Brown with the PID in the Title, photos of the site attached, and a brief explanation of why I considered the mark destroyed (since none of these included finding the actual disk). Was this correct?

[Wintertime]

Hi, Paul.

 

I honestly don't know what the NGS folks think about referring to information on other websites. I just hadn't seen it before and was curious. Anyone here know?

 

I don't know of any way to search the NGS site for reports from a certain person. Holograph, who posts the statistics of NGS recoveries by individual geocachers, may have some ideas on how one can do that.

 

Sounds like you accurately followed NGS's instructions for reporting a possibly destroyed mark when you don't have the disk in hand. How long has it been since you submitted them? It probably takes Deb longer to process those than simple found or not-found reports. From what I've seen people post here, she would let you know if there was a problem with your report.

 

You've really been racking up the finds! I hope you're enjoying it, and will keep us apprised of your adventures!

 

Patty

[+Black Dog Trackers]

2. I'm not clear on what I'm supposed to do to report a mark to NGS as "destroyed". I made my first 3 or 4 of these reports by filling out the on-line form with the "not recovered; not found" box checked, some notes added in the text box, and an email sent to Deb Brown with the PID in the Title, photos of the site attached, and a brief explanation of why I considered the mark destroyed (since none of these included finding the actual disk). Was this correct?

Yes, that is the correct thing to do. Only the NGS can put a "destroyed" classification on a mark, and they do it based on an email such as yours.

[southpawaz]

Hi, Paul.

 

I honestly don't know what the NGS folks think about referring to information on other websites. I just hadn't seen it before and was curious. Anyone here know?

 

Patty

 

I was looking at a datasheet yesterday for a station monumented in 1999 (AJ3686) by Maricopa County DOT that includes a reference to the Maricopa County website for additional photos and information. I've seen the station a couple of times, as it's at a trailhead I've done 3 hikes from, but I didn't post a recovery note because I didn't realize it was listed in the database until now.

[+pgrig]

Thanks everyone!

 

Thinking about "cross-referencing" to the Geocaching.com site for a particular entry, it seems to me (after only 5 months of experience ) that this would be really helpful in about 5-10% of my reports--the ones in which a picture (or pictures) of the site is particularly important, or in which intermingling picture/s and text seems particularly helpful in "unscrambling" a confusing site. Could some of you (Black Dog Trackers?) FAQ experts tell us if there is guidance pro- or con- on this topic?

 

I also have another question about "destroyed" marks. I find quite a few that I believe are 99% (or even 100%!) sure to have been buried under driveways, sidewalks or other paving. Some of these seem to be more certainly buried than others, i.e., the ones that are described as being "4.2 ft. from the curb" when the area within 10 ft. from the curb has been paved over, or ones that were originally described as set in dirt but now appear to be smack in the middle of someone's 30 ft.-wide, unbroken asphalt driveway. Does "virtually certain entombment" (well documented) usually qualify as "destroyed"? I suppose this would also go for marks that have clearly had a house constructed on top of them.

 

_______________

 

Patty: I believe I submitted my first "destroyed" reports to Deb about a week ago, and I have not heard back from her yet. I assume I'll only hear if there's a problem. And yes, I'm loving this hobby so far! I enjoy the hunting, the finding, the photography, and even the "paperwork"...and I believe that anything worth this much of my time and effort is also worth doing right. Thanks for the help!

 

-Paul

[Papa-Bear-NYC]

Thanks everyone!

...

I also have another question about "destroyed" marks. I find quite a few that I believe are 99% (or even 100%!) sure to have been buried under driveways, sidewalks or other paving. Some of these seem to be more certainly buried than others, i.e., the ones that are described as being "4.2 ft. from the curb" when the area within 10 ft. from the curb has been paved over, or ones that were originally described as set in dirt but now appear to be smack in the middle of someone's 30 ft.-wide, unbroken asphalt driveway. Does "virtually certain entombment" (well documented) usually qualify as "destroyed"? (emphasis added) I suppose this would also go for marks that have clearly had a house constructed on top of them.

...

-Paul

The answer to this is emphatically NO. Your mark may be entombed but still recovered years later when the driveway or house is removed for what ever reason.

 

Case in point: we found a mark which was known to be buried 18-22" deep and a building was built on top of it. (MZ1807). Can't get much more entombed that that. Guess what? The building was removed a few years ago and we dug down 18" and found the mark! And it was a copper bolt set in 1835, so it was a BIG find.

 

Entombed, but still alive, crying "Get me outta here"

Edited May 29, 2008 by Papa-Bear-NYC

[+pgrig]

Yegad! Well...that answers that question! Sounds like a new status category: EFAXPB: Entombed From Anyone Xcept Papa Bear. By the way, Mr. Bear, very impressive graphics, as usual!

[andylphoto]

 

I was looking at a datasheet yesterday for a station monumented in 1999 (AJ3686) by Maricopa County DOT that includes a reference to the Maricopa County website for additional photos and information. I've seen the station a couple of times, as it's at a trailhead I've done 3 hikes from, but I didn't post a recovery note because I didn't realize it was listed in the database until now.

 

My personal opinion, and I am NOT a surveyor. This is a great example of why the recovery report should be complete when submitted. Photos of the station can be submitted to Deb as well, if proper protocol is followed. I checked out the data sheet for this station. After going to the web site, it took me a while to find the search feature, which was a broken link that wasn't yet fixed on the web site, but redirected to the new one. Once I got there, I did a search for the keyword specified.

 

The first link was for a map, which I clicked on, and got a text box asking me to enter a password. A sub-link to that was next in line. I clicked it, and a brief error message, I think telling me I was using the wrong web browser, and it shut down the tab I was using. At least it didn't crash the whole browser. I tried again, and got a message that I needed to download an additional plug-in to view the map. All in all, a colossal waste of time.

 

I like a map, but having to go elsewhere to hunt down information takes time. Further, and this is just a guess, I'd suspect that some surveyors would take a stack of datasheets and not read the fine print until in the field. A direction to someplace else would be completely useless at that point. Make your recovery report complete, and submit pictures to Deb if you'd like. Just my $.02

 

As for "entombed" stations, Papa Bear is right on. Check and recheck to make sure your information is correct, then submit a Not Found report, with an explanation of what you didn't find. Here's one I didn't find that is probably still "there" and could some day be findable: RK0695.

[+Black Dog Trackers]

Here's a disk that is in a 2" deep irregular hole in the asphalt, seen just in front of the yellow Suunto compass. For a picture, I had to remove some water and bits of gravel which is what's in the foreground.

 

Amusingly, right nearby is another stealth benchmark! This one is hidden under the left trashcan.

[+Ernmark]

..regarding the original post - there are many pre-2000 benchmarks that for some reason or another have not made it into the Geocaching database. In my area, they mostly seem to date from 1942 - one example that comes to mind is KV2740 - a non-descript PADH disk along an abutment, although there are USC&GS disks as well...

[+Harry Dolphin]

KV1574 is about 4" under the asphalt pavement.