Reset markers

[GTWill]

Question:

If you fail to find a marker, # AB0000 with a designation E20 (example), then you find marker # AB1000 with a designation E20 RESET (example), do you report the first (AB0000) as destroyed or just not found?

[+Black Dog Trackers]

Not found.

[+seventhings]

GTWill -

This very topic was addressed in these forums a few months ago. The consensus of opinion (at least among the most knowledgeable in the community) was that you would report AB0000 as not found.

Logically, if AB1000 was created as AB0000's reset (or if AB0000 was overstamped as reset, moved to a new location and given the new PID AB1000), then AB0000 should not exist. It was likely either destroyed by being reset itself or destroyed by the change in the environmental conditions that motivated someone to create the reset mark. However, logic doesn't always rule the benchmark hunting world.

According to a number of other (more experienced) hunters, it is not uncommon for an original mark to survive, often in close proximity to its newer, reset version. So, as long as the old mark has a PID and has not been declared as destroyed by NGS, it should be treated as being an active, findable mark. Absent proof of destruction, you should treat your AB0000 as not-found. That is, like it was any other mark, disregarding the fact that it was the predecessor of a reset mark.

I have been unable to find any of the dozen or so pre-reset versions of reset marks that I've looked for. The GPS always seems to be pointing me to the middle lane of a three-lane paved highway. No matter, like any other mark under pavement, they're "not-found, probably destroyed/buried", but they're not "destroyed".

[+Corp Of Discovery]

What about this BM: http://www.geocaching.com/mark/details.asp?PID=ME1846 ? The only designation is T137 which is same as on the one I found and it clearly says it is a reset. The structure it is set on was built in 1981 so original is presumably destroyed, also 2 notes since 1981 say it was found (1987 & 1989). Thanks.

 

Remember, wherever you go- there you are!

[sixthings]

i hate to burst your bubble, but it appears as though you have not found ME1846. perhaps there was no PID assigned to the RESET; sometimes it happens. solicit opinions about the US Power Squadron, and you'll find it no surprise that they lgged it as "found". check out RX0680 for a good explanation by CallawayMT, a professional surveyor. check out alsoKK0564 and KK1344. this is a case in which a RESET was established in anticipation of the original getting destroyed by some planned renovatons. the irony is that the original survived the renovation, and evidently the RESET was in harm's way. it's possible that the RESET exists under the ground somewhere, therefore it's "Not Found", and not "Destroyed".

 

[This message was edited by sixthings on August 09, 2003 at 03:10 PM.]

[+GeckoGeek]

quote:

---

it's possible that the RESET exists under the ground somewhere, therefore it's "Not Found", and not "Destroyed".

---

 

Should I have listed TU0414as "not found"? I'm certain the disk is gone, but the post may remain if the traffic island was dug up. Is it good enough to report as destroyed to NGS?

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Point taken Sixthings...I will modify to a not found but leave message and picture. Upon reading some past posts it is apparent that the PID's are the main thing to look for and none was assigned to the reset mark.

What about this mark: ME2956 ? Thanks for any input...getting to like this benchmark thing.

 

Remember, wherever you go- there you are!

[+BlueDeuce]

In regards to ME2956: Identifying a destroyed mark, in this case a tank, in the midst of an industrial area can be tricky. In Iowa I have a pretty good chance finding photographs and news articles about a business at the local Historical Society. In Cook county? probably too much data to go through. I see that the Terraserver data is from 1999. Those photos might not be old enough, but I would eyeball them along with Topozone to see if the tank was present or not at that time. For real documentation I would contact the plant manager, explain to them what I was doing, give them a copy of the GC.com data, tell them that I would love to document the history of their company, and could they tell me if and when the tank was removed. If the manager confirms the destruction, then I would log it as Destroyed.

 

It probably is destroyed, but it is best to have documented proof, especially if reporting it to NGS. Otherwise you might be "off your mark".

 

Terraserver

Topozone

 

 

Side note on the 1952 recovery. How did they go from HEIGHT IS 320 FEET (1944) to STRUCTURE ABOUT 200 FEET HIGH and PROBABLY THE SAME STATION AS LOCATED IN 1944.

 

I'm sorry....., probably?

[+seventhings]

Corp of Discovery -

Re: ME2956 (and hundreds more like it)

I post such obviously destroyed stuctures as "Destroyed" regularly in the Geocaching database. Don't need a PhD to figure out that a water tank is gone. However, as has been discussed in this forum at length in the past, the NGS database standards for documenting a destruction are considerably greater than saying "I know it was there before and I know it's not there anymore." The steps suggested by TeamX40 would probably satisfy NGS.

Disks are another matter. I almost never (exactly one out of about 350 hunts) report a disk as destroyed in the Geocaching database. Too easy to miss 'em. I would hate to have SIXTHINGS come by and find a disk I reported as destroyed. He does this sort of thing all the time.

[+Corp Of Discovery]

Yeah I caught that also. This really isn't in a heavily industrialized area tho. Just one factory within a 1/4 mile or so of spot picture was taken. I think picture is of what is left of tower...but of course cannot be sure... like it says in my log it would be hard to miss a 200-300' tower in any case. Will try to follow up with the city, hopefully they would know if such a large natual gas storage tank was in the area. Fire department might be my best chance. There does seem to be two quite different standards that need to be met, NGS & GC.com. I think that since I dont have as much time to devote to be as accurate as the NGS needs I'll go with the more relaxed GC.com standards- but still try and be as accurate and descriptive as I can be in the logs and upload pictures as I have been doing.

Remember, wherever you go- there you are!

 

[This message was edited by Corp Of Discovery on August 09, 2003 at 07:28 PM.]

[+Kewaneh & Shark]

Something to remember about the benchmarks we all search for a geocachers and benchmarkers: what we find, and how we intrepret what we find, (such as 'destruction' of a mark) may or may not be what a surveyor finds or intreprets. A tank or tower (or other large structure) that has been removed, torn down, or just vanished is a no brainer. It's not there. It's that simple. Benchmark disks are a different story. Surveyors have the tools and resources to do a much more thourough search than most benchmarkers, along with the knowledge of where to look and for how long. If it's there, we'll nost likely find it. This includes covered or buried marks. Also, many times, what looks destroyed, such as a broken or missing disk, may still be usable as a benchmark to a surveyor.

 

As geocachers and benchmarkers, if you find a mark and you think it's destroyed, go ahead and log it as such on THIS site. Just remember that the NGS database is real world information in use daily by real world professionals and an erroneous report of destruction would do more damage than good.

 

Keep on Caching!

- Kewaneh

[sixthings]

i have 2 marks that i have reported as destroyed. one was on the wall of a bank that got torn down in '34. on the other one, the concrete monument that housed the mark is broken to pieces, and is really not usable to anybody anymore. i don't think i will ever report anything as destroyed to the NGS; i just dont consider myself qualified, as this is just a hobby to me. the only way i would consider it is if it were a large structure that could be historically documented as gone. regarding TU014, i would log it as Not Found. your coordinates are adjusted, so i am sure you are in the right place. however, even with a clear sky and a WAAS GPSr, you have a 10' radius to deal with. it's possible that it's been covered in mulch, sod, or asphalt, like kk2111.

[+GeckoGeek]

quote:

---

Originally posted by sixthings:

i have 2 marks that i have reported as destroyed. one was on the wall of a bank that got torn down in '34. on the other one, the concrete monument that housed the mark is broken to pieces, and is really not usable to anybody anymore. i don't think i will ever report anything as destroyed to the NGS;

---

 

In the situations you've mentioned, I would. It doesn't do anyone any good to have bad data floating around. I've got a situation where I know the building was demolished and replaced with a new building of the same name. Someone coming along later may not realize it's a different mark.

 

It looks to me that you are not the deciding factor in "destroying" a mark. You submit to the NGS and if they think it's proof enough, they'll do it.

 

quote:

---

regarding TU014, i would log it as Not Found. your coordinates are adjusted, so i am sure you are in the right place. however, even with a clear sky and a WAAS GPSr, you have a 10' radius to deal with. it's possible that it's been covered in mulch, sod, or asphalt, like kk2111.

---

 

It's a bit hard to cover a traffic island. I've found 3 marks mentioned that point it to where it should be. Since it appears to have been on top of the sidewalk, any lowering of the sidewalk would have forced the removal of the disk. I should mention the traffic island is all cement - no grass to hide things.

[boundsgoer]

You could file a Recovery Note, check "mark not found" and state in the notes that the building was torn down and a new one erected.

 

Most surveyors searching for bench marks on the NGS site would read your recovery note, assume the mark was destroyed and move on to the next one.