How would you log these 3 in GC, and in NGS databases?

[TillaMurphs]

How would you log these 3 marks in the:

.... a: Geocaching database

.... b: NGS database

 

Found in Poor Condition, Destroyed, or??

 

1) Rivet in the concrete base of a RR wig-wag where the wig-wag was replaced with a newer signaling device and now the original concrete base (and rivet) are sitting alone (abandoned) many yards from their original location.

Here are photos and story: RD0670

 

2) Rivet in a culvert headwall where the concrete headwall has broken in half and turned and slid a foot or two from its original location.

Here are photos and story: RD0654

 

3) A disk originally set in an 8”x8” concrete monument where the top half of the monument has broken off and disappeared. There is no indication of the hole where the disk stem sat – it was broken off below that. However the remaining base appears to be firmly set in its original location. (This has been one of our favorite finds and we have spent multiple trips over many months to locate and verify it. As soon as we get an idea of how to log this on GC we will post the story and photos in here: RD0668)

 

Thanks,

 

The TillaMurphs

[+m&h]

The mark's geodetic position is the issue. If it is not where it was set, then by NGS standards--or any other surveying standards we know of--it is destroyed, because it is useless as a point from which to take any measurements, linear or angular. It is not immediately obvious to all that a mark you can see, whose stamping is legible, is destroyed, but if it isn't where it belongs, it is destroyed. For a good example of our own early failure to grasp this, see PE0286. So (1) and (2) meet the criteria for destroyed. In our opinion, (3) also does, because the post is broken off far enough below the level of the disk that the best you can do for a position is pray that the disk was set above the center of the remaining piece of the post. For most purposes this will not be sufficient, to put it mildly.

 

There is disagreement about how to log these. One school of thought holds that for an NGS report, checking the not found box and saying in the comment box that destruction appears likely is a procedure preferable to sending Deb Brown compelling evidence of destruction. One reason is that potentially useful information about the disk remains as readily accessible as that in any other active data sheet. True, data about destroyed marks can be extracted from the NGS site, but that requires a few more keystrokes and the awareness that it can be done.

 

For a Geocaching log, we can think of no argument against logging a mark as destroyed except doubt in one's own competence to make the call.

 

Cheers,

[+Black Dog Trackers]

There is disagreement about how to log these.

By "these", I assume you mean just #3.

[Bill93]

I prefer the "Found Poor" option instead of NF. You did find them, after all. They just aren't where they should be. Whether they are sufficiently Poor as to be Destroyed is a call that must be made by NGS.

 

I sort of like Papa Bear's idea of logging Poor and later sending the evidence to Deb for professional judgment. You probably have enough evidence for 1 and 2, but not for 3.

[+2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

E 55 is a classic example of a benchmark that could be described as destroyed, but it is still in use today. We drove past it a couple of days ago and it had fresh orange paint on it. Don't know why someone would still use it, but it definitely showed signs of being recently used even though it has been uprooted for at least 5 years!

 

John

[Bill93]

I don't know what the paint was for, but no professional surveyor would use a mark that had been obviously uprooted.

 

No one seems to have reported this one to NGS as the last recovery on the GR0095 E 55 data sheet was 1982.

[+2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

I don't know what the paint was for, but no professional surveyor would use a mark that had been obviously uprooted.

 

No one seems to have reported this one to NGS as the last recovery on the GR0095 E 55 data sheet was 1982.

 

The paint was "E 55" and I have no clue as to why that was painted on it, but that seems to indicate that someone has some use for it.

 

John

[+m&h]

Some further thoughts.

 

BDT--our own practice is to send an e-mail to Deb Brown when we are confident of a mark's destruction, and not to log it at all, but just to wait a while and see how NGS responds. But we believe we have seen on other threads the argument we describe for not reporting destruction.

 

Bill93--The above would probably be our approach to (1) and (2), even though we found the mark, as you say. You are quite right that only the pros can decide for sure whether a mark has any use left in it, but we feel that it was ignorance that led us to doubt the destruction of PE0286. We photographed it in a piece of its original setting which had been moved from a seawall to the top of a hill.

 

As to E 55, maybe somebody is experimenting with a new stability classification.

[foxtrot_xray]

1) Rivet in the concrete base of a RR wig-wag where the wig-wag was replaced with a newer signaling device and now the original concrete base (and rivet) are sitting alone (abandoned) many yards from their original location.

Here are photos and story: RD0670

 

I'm REALLY sad to hear this. I had seen that 'wag in action years ago, and had hoped it had plenty of time left. That's depressing. :/

[+Harry Dolphin]

Destroyed on GC. Note to Deb suggesting 'destroyed status', and go with her decision.

My example is: KV1383. GC lists last find in 1973. I was going by the GC list. NGS reported it destroyed in 2005. Deb said that I could take it home if I wanted. It is not in the proper position. It is of no use to anyone. It is destroyed.

[68-eldo]

Destroyed on GC. Note to Deb suggesting 'destroyed status', and go with her decision.

My example is: KV1383. GC lists last find in 1973. I was going by the GC list. NGS reported it destroyed in 2005. Deb said that I could take it home if I wanted. It is not in the proper position. It is of no use to anyone. It is destroyed.

 

So did you take it home and plant it in your front yard? I would.

[TillaMurphs]

1) Rivet in the concrete base of a RR wig-wag where the wig-wag was replaced with a newer signaling device and now the original concrete base (and rivet) are sitting alone (abandoned) many yards from their original location.

Here are photos and story: RD0670

 

I'm REALLY sad to hear this. I had seen that 'wag in action years ago, and had hoped it had plenty of time left. That's depressing. :/

 

Wow foxtrot_xray, you get around! You live in Georgia and you have been to tiny Timber, Oregon!

On this page, the 3 wig-wag pictures are of the 'wag that you saw in Timber. It is in a yard in Tillamook: Another one has fallen

 

At least you might be glad to hear that there is one 'wag still functioning on this line. It is in Banks, Oregon - my wife and I visited it a few weeks ago.

 

The TillaMurphs.

[Z15]

Based on your description of them, all 3 are destroyed IMO. I would take pics of the evidence and send to Deb at NGS. I am sure she will concur.

 

Any evidence of movement no matter how slight is reason for concern. The fact the the disk or other object if intact but not in its original position is whats of concern. Given the current condition, the elevations are lost.

[foxtrot_xray]

Wow foxtrot_xray, you get around! You live in Georgia and you have been to tiny Timber, Oregon!

On this page, the 3 wig-wag pictures are of the 'wag that you saw in Timber. It is in a yard in Tillamook: Another one has fallen

 

At least you might be glad to hear that there is one 'wag still functioning on this line. It is in Banks, Oregon - my wife and I visited it a few weeks ago.

Yeah, I'm a travelbug. My '02 Mini Cooper has 250k miles on it. Working for a railroad short-line in Georgia on their signals, I've always loved Wigwags, so I've kept track of many of them. Having lived out near Delhi, Colorado, I have my eye on that one every time I go out to my family's ranch. As soon as that one looks like it's coming down, I'm purchasing it from them.

 

Back OT - personally, I'd report them to the NGS as Poor - I always try to be safe than sorry - on GC here I'd say Destroyed. YMMV.

[Mesa Mike]

There were some lower-quadrant wig-wags on the old Pacific Electric line that passed through the town I grew up in (Rialto, CA) that were in use well into the 1990's. They are gone now. When the Union Pacific merged with the Southern Pacific (the new company kept Union Pacific's first name and Southern Pacific's last name) the grade crossings were modernized with new gates, lights and bells, and new grade crossing predictors and controllers. Why they bothered with the upgrade is beyond me. The line gets used only once or twice a week to haul a couple cars of lumber to a local lumber store near the end of the track..

[foxtrot_xray]

There were some lower-quadrant wig-wags on the old Pacific Electric line that passed through the town I grew up in (Rialto, CA) that were in use well into the 1990's. They are gone now. When the Union Pacific merged with the Southern Pacific (the new company kept Union Pacific's first name and Southern Pacific's last name) the grade crossings were modernized with new gates, lights and bells, and new grade crossing predictors and controllers. Why they bothered with the upgrade is beyond me. The line gets used only once or twice a week to haul a couple cars of lumber to a local lumber store near the end of the track..

While we're drifting off-topic, I like this subject too much to not answer.

 

The main reason is that they HAD to upgrade. When there's a new owner on the line, they're required to make everything compliant. (The previous owner didn't have to worry about it, as there's something akin to a 'grandfather' clause, whereas the Wigwags worked, so no need to tear them down. The new owner doesn't have that luxury, so had to upgrade them.) Interestingly enough, they ALSO couldn't simply add to the crossing - for example, they couldn't keep the wigwags and add lights and gates. The reason is because if the wigwag failed, and someone ignored the lights and gates getting hurt by hitting a train, they could go after the railroad stating that their signals weren't working. (Yes, despite the gates and lights activated, if the wigwag wasn't..)

 

At least, that's how it is down here in the southeast. I can only assume it's the same out thatways.

[+Klemmer]

Thanks for the pics. I had no clue what a wig-wag was!

[+Harry Dolphin]

Destroyed on GC. Note to Deb suggesting 'destroyed status', and go with her decision.

My example is: KV1383. GC lists last find in 1973. I was going by the GC list. NGS reported it destroyed in 2005. Deb said that I could take it home if I wanted. It is not in the proper position. It is of no use to anyone. It is destroyed.

 

So did you take it home and plant it in your front yard? I would.

 

I haven't been back that way. I will take the e-mail from Deb is I do. Post looks heavy. My sister would love to plant it in her yard if I do go for it...