Oldest benchmarks?

[+Black Dog Trackers]

Papa-Bear-NYC

Here's a little twist on this subject: What recoveries have you done with the longest time interval since the last recorded recovery (either on the NGS datasheets, or here on the Geocaching site)?

Check out this old topic.

[+ProudVirginian]

I found an 1871 mark HV5568. The ref marks were still there. Two of them had been updated in 1927, but a third was still an etched rock. The mark was a simple bolt in the rock, but I couldn't help thinking how difficult it must have been to wagon ride out there and then climb the hill with all that equipment and drill the rock for the bolt. It made it all the better when I found it to think about the person standing there 136 years prior.

[+Holtie22]

 

Finding Buttermilk LX4113 was a lot of fun. Papa Bear NYC describes the adventure in this thread.

 

It is also featured in this NOAA Article on the site celebrating their 200th anniversary.

[NGS Surveyor]

The oldest first-order triangulation station in the U.S. is station BUTTERMILK 1833. It was part of USC&GS Superintendent F.R. Hassler’s second survey project in the New York City area. See my article, with photos, at: http://celebrating200years.noaa.gov/founda...e1_spatial.html

 

SANDY HOOK LIGHTHOUSE FINIAL (KV4984) was part of Hassler’s first survey project in 1816-1817. The top, metal portion of the lighthouse was rebuilt in the 1850’s, however. This is the sole remaining station from the 1816-1817 survey. See a sketch of the project (and article with photo) at: http://celebrating200years.noaa.gov/founda...come.html#intro

 

The U.S. Coast & Geodetic Survey began using disks for survey marks about the year 1900. The U.S. Geological Survey began a few years earlier. Prior to 1900, the USC&GS used an assortment of other items, see the article at: http://celebrating200years.noaa.gov/survey...ks/welcome.html

 

I have been working on setting up a contest for a photo of the oldest USC&GS survey disk – start looking!

 

GeorgeL

NGS

[+ddnutzy]

Here's a list of the older BM's that I've found over the years. I've found over 30 from the 1800's. Most of them are FTF.

MZ1504 1832 oldest in Ma.

MZ1615 1832

MZ1702 1832

MY3617 1834 oldest in RI.

MY3611 1834

LW5088 1834

MY2666 1834 oldest in NH

MZ1913 1836 oldest in VT

OC2210 1842 oldest in ME

 

Dave

[NGS Surveyor]

Somehow this didn't get posted the first time I uploaded it earlier today (hope this isn't a duplicate later):

 

The oldest first-order triangulation station in the U.S. is station BUTTERMILK 1833. It was part of USC&GS Superintendent F.R. Hassler’s second survey project in the New York City area. See my article, with photos, at: http://celebrating200years.noaa.gov/founda...e1_spatial.html

 

SANDY HOOK LIGHTHOUSE FINIAL (KV4984) was part of Hassler’s first survey project in 1816-1817. The top, metal portion of the lighthouse was rebuilt in the 1850’s, however. This is the sole remaining station from the 1816-1817 survey. See a sketch of the project (and article with photo) at: http://celebrating200years.noaa.gov/founda...come.html#intro

 

The U.S. Coast & Geodetic Survey began using disks for survey marks about the year 1900. The U.S. Geological Survey began a few years earlier. Prior to 1900, the USC&GS used an assortment of other items, see the article at: http://celebrating200years.noaa.gov/survey...ks/welcome.html

 

I have been working on setting up a contest for a photo of the oldest USC&GS survey disk – start looking!

 

GeorgeL

NGS

[+Black Dog Trackers]

Looking back in the forum, I see some old disks:

1891 Mississippi River (actually a pipe cap disk)

1892 USGS disk

Also, here's some research by holograph.

[+Harry Dolphin]

As someone said: There are lots of nice, old drill holes that have had disks put into them... OC2186 . A very nice 1842 drill hole with a 1912 disk put into it. I think the oldest disk I've found was from 1900.

LY2623 is an 1881 copper bolt. But, I'm not convinced that it is the original bolt.

[Papa-Bear-NYC]

As someone said: There are lots of nice, old drill holes that have had disks put into them... OC2186 . A very nice 1842 drill hole with a 1912 disk put into it. I think the oldest disk I've found was from 1900.

Great! That looks like one of GEL's "flat" CGS disks. Notice it says "SUPERINTENDENT" instead of "DIRECTOR". Good one.

LY2623 is an 1881 copper bolt. But, I'm not convinced that it is the original bolt.

Yeah, that looks more like an iron rod. Copper doesn't rust like that. But it's a nice station to recover, especially with all 3 RMs found.

Edited March 21, 2008 by Papa-Bear-NYC

[+Klemmer]

The original post left the question wide open in terms of "oldest benchmark". Guess it depends on your definitions. But it's always fun to look at and search for the older discs. Here's an example that I recovered which is a reset disc, in place of the much older "original equipment" sub-surfrace mark, "a stone with a lead plug with a brass tack marking its center". It is triangulation station TS2013 (Malva-2):

 

(BTW: I belive there is a typo in the original monumentation date, when the digital data input was done. I'm guessing the 1940 CGS surveyors had access to the original 1860 documents, and got it right on the reset disc. Assuming above correct, it's in the top 60 oldest in the state, of about 63,000 NGS mark in California. They don't get too much older out here.)

[+Black Dog Trackers]

1892 USGS disk

Humbug! 1892 is the elevation!

 

OK then, here's a disk monumented in 1898.

[+Mega Scooter]

In Oregon, This must be one of the oldest Disks. It's an old style C&GS disk placed in 1903. RD1700 YAM 1903 I found it today and ... ok I'm very proud of it.

[foxtrot_xray]

Here's a little twist on this subject: What recoveries have you done with the longest time interval since the last recorded recovery (either on the NGS datasheets, or here on the Geocaching site)?

Yet ANOTHER twist on it.. how many recent recoveries have you had to a station AFTER you found it?

 

For example, EE0200. There's absolutely NOTHING special about the station - except that I 'found' it in 2004, and was the first recovery note since 1972. (I was the 'Individual Contractors', before I started using the GEOCAC agency code.) Then, after I recorded it, everyone started reporting it.

 

I don't have any old disks - many local to me are all set in 1933 or later. (There seems to have been a rash in '3 to get a whole lot of disks set.) Now, I have some older chiseled crosses and squares that I've recovered. Do those count?

Edited May 18, 2008 by foxtrot_xray

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

In Oregon, This must be one of the oldest Disks. It's an old style C&GS disk placed in 1903. RD1700 YAM 1903 I found it today and ... ok I'm very proud of it.

 

Very Nice recovery!! And welcome to Benchmark Hunting!

 

Good hunting.....

[AZcachemeister]

In Oregon, This must be one of the oldest Disks. It's an old style C&GS disk placed in 1903. RD1700 YAM 1903 I found it today and ... ok I'm very proud of it.

 

VERY nice!

And interesting to note that all eight notes on the mark are MONUMENTED, not RECOVERY.

Seems that everyone felt the need to upgrade the mark in some fashion.

[+Mega Scooter]

VERY nice!

And interesting to note that all eight notes on the mark are MONUMENTED, not RECOVERY.

Seems that everyone felt the need to upgrade the mark in some fashion.

 

Yes, the mark looks like it could very useful. To the East, it overlooks the Willamette Valley to the Cascade Range, and to the West, the Chehalem Valley to the Coast Range.

[+PFF]

I checked Holograph's list of old benchmarks. FA1351 and FA1352 were recovered by GEOCAC in 2005. It was the first update in 30 years.

 

EA0542 is the other mark in North Carolina. It's in Wilmington, NC. Aerial photos suggest it might still be there. However, it is just as likely that the railroad bridge has been rebuilt.

 

-Paul-

[+ea6bflyr]

I recovered (FTR) the OLDEST CALIFORNIA Benchmark DC1668 (according to Extreme Benchmarking) today! Whoo Hoo!

 

-ea6bflyr

Edited May 23, 2008 by ea6bflyr

[+Black Dog Trackers]

ea6bflyr -

 

Wow, ASTRO has had quite a history!

 

I think you could count finds on both this PID and DC0807 in one shot.

 

I find it odd that a triangulation station disk marks a location-scaled PID.

[+PFF]

In the ASTRO description, did you pick up on the change from ink bottles (in the 1800's) to beverage bottles in 1942? I suppose the idea is to use what is handy and plentiful. A salute to the survey party for drinking Pepsi (which was invented here in North Carolina). Good choice!

 

As for the contents of the "pint" bottle, we can only speculate. But, if it was what I suspect, we might have the explanation for how "right" and "left" sometimes get reversed, or how two marks get entered in the database with the same coordinates.

 

Frankly, it would take the contents of several pint bottles to give me the courage to climb a Bilby tower!

 

-Paul-

 

A fringe benefit of being in a survey party, back in the days when they used beverage bottles as markers, was helping build the inventory of materials.

[NGS Surveyor]

For information on the oldest U.S. Coast & Geodetic Survey marks see my article at: http://celebrating200years.noaa.gov/founda...al/welcome.html

especially the map of Hassler's 1816-1817 survey (including Sandy Hook Lighthouse)

and the sidebar on station BUTTERMILK 1833, the oldest, surviving first-order survey mark

in the U.S.

GeorgeL

NGS

[+Klemmer]

Awesome, ea6bflyr. I've been looking at that one for a couple years, even though I'm a couple - three hours away (North Orange County). I get down that way sometimes. I made a few phone calls to some offices on base, but no one was very "receptive". Looks like it took someone with some extra access (or at least perseverance). Nice going! Did you or will you log it with NGS?

 

P.S. Don't you have to wonder where the CGS was looking in 1963? Or, did the mark(s) really get covered by a parking lot, then unburied later?

Edited May 23, 2008 by Klemmer & TeddyBearMama

[+ea6bflyr]

Awesome, ea6bflyr. I've been looking at that one for a couple years, even though I'm a couple - three hours away (North Orange County). I get down that way sometimes. I made a few phone calls to some offices on base, but no one was very "receptive". Looks like it took someone with some extra access (or at least perseverance). Nice going! Did you or will you log it with NGS?

 

P.S. Don't you have to wonder where the CGS was looking in 1963? Or, did the mark(s) really get covered by a parking lot, then unburied later?

 

How do you go about logging it with NGS?

 

To answer your question, I'm in the Navy and it pays to show up in uniform.

 

-ea6bflyr

[+Black Dog Trackers]

ea6bflyr -

 

Here is an excellent topic written by NGS employee caseyb!

 

There's no need to rush to do NGS reports, but when you feel ready, it gives benchmark hunting an extra dimension in the purpose of the activity.

Edited May 23, 2008 by Black Dog Trackers

[+ea6bflyr]

 

How do you go about logging it with NGS?

 

To answer your question, I'm in the Navy and it pays to show up in uniform.

 

-ea6bflyr

 

Nevermind, I figured it out and logged the Benchmark. Thanks!

 

-ea6bflyr

[+ea6bflyr]

ea6bflyr -

 

Here is an excellent topic written by NGS employee caseyb!

 

There's no need to rush to do NGS reports, but when you feel ready, it gives benchmark hunting an extra dimension in the purpose of the activity.

 

GREAT INFO and thanks for the link!!

 

-ea6bflyr

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

I recovered (FTR) the OLDEST CALIFORNIA Benchmark DC1668 (according to Extreme Benchmarking) today! Whoo Hoo!

 

-ea6bflyr

 

HMM now this one is 51 years older set in 1800 by USE.

It was logged in the Bingo contest,now I am going to have to do some more research.

AI4534 SP 3

[+ea6bflyr]

 

HMM now this one is 51 years older set in 1800 by USE.

It was logged in the Bingo contest,now I am going to have to do some more research.

AI4534 SP 3

 

Extreme Benchmarking excluded this benchmark because it was possibly monumented in 1995.

 

-ea6bflyr

Edited May 24, 2008 by ea6bflyr

[+Klemmer]

Geo:

I'm pretty sure that 1800 date is bogus. I've asked Deb to look into it, but you know how busy she is. Considering that the area still belonged to Mexico until 1848 or so, I sort of doubt the US Engineers were setting benchmarks out here. Some sort of typo in the database.

Klemmer

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

Geo:

I'm pretty sure that 1800 date is bogus. I've asked Deb to look into it, but you know how busy she is. Considering that the area still belonged to Mexico until 1848 or so, I sort of doubt the US Engineers were setting benchmarks out here. Some sort of typo in the database.

Klemmer

 

Probaly so.

 

If you remember I wrote you a while back on the other one.

I knew I would never get to it.

I am glad to see Astro is still there though.

 

I will have to look on the list again of all those oldies.

[CallawayMT]

I recovered (FTR) the OLDEST CALIFORNIA Benchmark DC1668 (according to Extreme Benchmarking) today! Whoo Hoo!

 

-ea6bflyr

 

HMM now this one is 51 years older set in 1800 by USE.

It was logged in the Bingo contest,now I am going to have to do some more research.

AI4534 SP 3

 

There is a slew of other USE marks in the area and all of them were set in 1940. These disks are the same style as SP 3.

 

Chances are that SP3 was also set in 1940, which make more sense given the disk type and setting.

 

CallawayMT

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

There is a slew of other USE marks in the area and all of them were set in 1940. These disks are the same style as SP 3.

 

Chances are that SP3 was also set in 1940, which make more sense given the disk type and setting.

 

CallawayMT

 

I did see those as well.

I dont think that agency on the benchmark was founded until 1807 was it?

[+Klemmer]

Another angle:

Discs weren't in use then either, and there is no history of other types of marks (bottle, copper bolt, chiseled mark, etc), if the current disc was a reset.

[+ea6bflyr]

I found BG1691 in Florida but the disk says 1855 and the datasheet says 1955, can anyone tell me why the disparity in dates? Thanks.

 

-ea6bflyr

 

[Bill93]

They weren't using disks in 1855. Other nearby marks in the *163 series were set in 1955, for instance U 163 and H 163.

 

The guy doing the stamping on M 163 grabbed the wrong digit stamp, or else because they are so deeply imprinted it just looks like an 8 but was really a 9. I'd want to get a square-on and close-up look at the number to be sure.

 

The pictures raise another question. Why do a all 3 in this series with suitable pictures in their logs have a dot or punch mark a short distance from the cast center mark?

Edited May 29, 2008 by Bill93

[CallawayMT]

They weren't using disks in 1855. Other nearby marks in the *163 series were set in 1955, for instance U 163 and H 163.

 

The guy doing the stamping on M 163 grabbed the wrong digit stamp, or else because they are so deeply imprinted it just looks like an 8 but was really a 9. I'd want to get a square-on and close-up look at the number to be sure.

 

The pictures raise another question. Why do a all 3 in this series with suitable pictures in their logs have a dot or punch mark a short distance from the cast center mark?

 

Bill,

 

If you notice there was an era in the 50's & 60's where the disks had a hole drilled all the way through the disks. The USC&GS thought that this would act as an air release while seating the disk in concrete. They found out that the hole was not a good idea due to the fact that some thought this was the correct punch mark. I think that they also found that water got into some marks and the freeze-thaw action was not a good thing for geodetic disks.

 

CallawayMT

[+ea6bflyr]

They weren't using disks in 1855. Other nearby marks in the *163 series were set in 1955, for instance U 163 and H 163.

 

The guy doing the stamping on M 163 grabbed the wrong digit stamp, or else because they are so deeply imprinted it just looks like an 8 but was really a 9. I'd want to get a square-on and close-up look at the number to be sure.

 

The pictures raise another question. Why do a all 3 in this series with suitable pictures in their logs have a dot or punch mark a short distance from the cast center mark?

 

Sounds about right....I'll see if I can get a better picture of the BM. Thanks.

 

-ea6bflyr

[+ea6bflyr]

They weren't using disks in 1855. Other nearby marks in the *163 series were set in 1955, for instance U 163 and H 163.

 

The guy doing the stamping on M 163 grabbed the wrong digit stamp, or else because they are so deeply imprinted it just looks like an 8 but was really a 9. I'd want to get a square-on and close-up look at the number to be sure.

 

The pictures raise another question. Why do a all 3 in this series with suitable pictures in their logs have a dot or punch mark a short distance from the cast center mark?

 

Sounds about right....I'll see if I can get a better picture of the BM. Thanks.

 

-ea6bflyr

 

You were correct. Here are the closeup pictures:

-ea6bflyr

[Bill93]

Glad the mystery is solved. This might be a case where baby powder would have helped bring out the lettering.

 

White powders must be carried in the original factory labeled container. Cornstarch was recommended for a time and may be better, but it is hard to carry in its original container, and I sure wouldn't want to have to convince law enforcement of what I was carrying without a label.

[wwflover13]

Glad the mystery is solved. This might be a case where baby powder would have helped bring out the lettering.

Congrats on figuring out the stamping issue! Luckily you don't live too far away from that mark, it would probably be frustrating for you if you had found it on vacation and couldn't visit again! I must second the baby powder suggestion. It can really help to make the lettering stand out, especially when they are worn or aren't stamped well.

 

White powders must be carried in the original factory labeled container. Cornstarch was recommended for a time and may be better, but it is hard to carry in its original container, and I sure wouldn't want to have to convince law enforcement of what I was carrying without a label.

Unless you can easily find a manufacturers bottle of practical size to carry around with you, I don't think getting a labeled container should be a top priority. This is the bottle of baby powder I carry. Since baby powder has such a stong smell to it, the contents of the bottle should be easily recognizable if anyone comes up to me while I'm using it.

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Has anyone ever been questioned about the "White Powder" they just rubbed on to that 'metal disk'?

 

Seems like a non-problem to get all stressed about. If the officer is that intense he will confiscate you bottle of baby powder and have it tested in a lab regardless of what the bottle might smell like.

 

Relax and enjoy the recovering of the benchmarks.

 

John

[Gravinaut]

I found this site that has all the "extreme" markers for each state as well as a link to all states... Newest marker, oldest, most southern, northern, highest elevation, lowest etc....

 

http://www.holoscenes.com/special/geocac/extreme_index.html

 

I looked at everyones pics until I got to the end of this thread... It seems like the fine for disturbing one of these markers has always been $250 or imprisonment... Of course for todays standards... those are two very extreme punishments... Does anyone know what year this was first put on the markers? I'm wondering what the cost would be today if we factored inflation.

Grav

[+Black Dog Trackers]

Gravinaut -

 

Yes the holoscenes site belongs to holograph, a regular here in the forum. Here is a topic that addresses your question about the $250 fine and inflation.

[+ea6bflyr]

Glad the mystery is solved. This might be a case where baby powder would have helped bring out the lettering.

Congrats on figuring out the stamping issue! Luckily you don't live too far away from that mark, it would probably be frustrating for you if you had found it on vacation and couldn't visit again! I must second the baby powder suggestion. It can really help to make the lettering stand out, especially when they are worn or aren't stamped well.

 

White powders must be carried in the original factory labeled container. Cornstarch was recommended for a time and may be better, but it is hard to carry in its original container, and I sure wouldn't want to have to convince law enforcement of what I was carrying without a label.

Unless you can easily find a manufacturers bottle of practical size to carry around with you, I don't think getting a labeled container should be a top priority. This is the bottle of baby powder I carry. Since baby powder has such a stong smell to it, the contents of the bottle should be easily recognizable if anyone comes up to me while I'm using it.

 

Funny you mention vacation...I am in Florida for only a week and this BM was close to the hotel. As for the baby powder or corn starch....great...another thing I'll have to carry in my swag bag. Thanks for all the help!!

 

-ea6bflyr

Edited May 31, 2008 by ea6bflyr

[CallawayMT]

I found this site that has all the "extreme" markers for each state as well as a link to all states... Newest marker, oldest, most southern, northern, highest elevation, lowest etc....

 

http://www.holoscenes.com/special/geocac/extreme_index.html

 

I looked at everyones pics until I got to the end of this thread... It seems like the fine for disturbing one of these markers has always been $250 or imprisonment... Of course for todays standards... those are two very extreme punishments... Does anyone know what year this was first put on the markers? I'm wondering what the cost would be today if we factored inflation.

Grav

 

Grav,

 

You can check out this very informative article about the $250 fine, by Jerry Penry.

 

$250 Fine

 

CallawayMT

[foxtrot_xray]

Grav,

 

You can check out this very informative article about the $250 fine, by Jerry Penry.

 

$250 Fine

 

CallawayMT

Very, very good article. Thanks for sharing that.

[+geosym]

Here is one not far from my home in Tacoma WA in Wrights Park.

SY2718 was monumented in 1892 and as part of a recent park renovation the monument was cleaned up and looks very nice now. Used to look pretty gnarly with all the moss and dirt.

[+ea6bflyr]

Here is one not far from my home in Tacoma WA in Wrights Park.

SY2718 was monumented in 1892 and as part of a recent park renovation the monument was cleaned up and looks very nice now. Used to look pretty gnarly with all the moss and dirt.

 

geosym,

Cool BM, thanks for posting.

-ea6bflyr

[+Harry Dolphin]

 

PE2186 1863 Bolt. Unfortunately, you are not allowed on top of the walls to take a closer picture.

 

 

QF0712 1909.

The boundary monument was monumented in 1921, but noted in the 1909 monumentation for QF0712. So, I'm not sure how old they are.

[PL8S4JON]

geosym. Thank you for the great pictures of that stone. Awesome.

 

-Jon