U.S. Power Squadron sucks.

[+Rich in NEPA]

 

KV2820

 

I believe this to be another prime example of why it's not a good idea to be suggesting the reporting of survey mark recoveries to the NGS by over-zealous amateurs. A blind man could have found this one! Good thing I decided to check for nearby “skulls” before driving down to this area on Friday.

 

Also, the problem with the benchmarking website searches that show Not Founds as destroyed ("skulls") even after a more recent recovery reports it as Found, really needs some immediate attention. Administrators, are you listening?! I don't have an issue with flagging current Not Founds with the skull icons, but they should be listed in all normal searches, too. Oh, and does anyone know when the database is going to be updated???

 

Now that this activity is receiving positive recognition from the NGS (Thank you, DaveD!) and the surveying community in general, isn't it time to put more effort into fixing the obviously serious problems instead of like, umm ... worrying about the color of unvisited links on the benchmark pages?! Please DO NOT let these fine opportunities die through shear neglect. Thanks.

 

Cheers ...

 

~Rich in NEPA~

 

--- A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ---

[+gnbrotz]

Well said Rich!

 

I support your sentiments 100%.

 

Greg

N 39 54.705'

W 77 33.137'

[+Zhanna]

Thank you, R, for stating so succintly what you and I have been discussing for some time now. These are issues that really need to be addressed soon. More of us are hunting benchmarks, and our work is being taken more seriously by the NGS. Without some attention to the details—get rid of the "skull" bug, update the database, develop a consistent standard for logging these marks (not necessarily one that's in line with the Geocaching found/not found paradigm)—we're all going to look as amateurish as the U.S. Power Squadron. I'd like to be proud to use the GEOCAC contributor code on official recovery reports I do submit, but unless some things change around here, I'll continue to submit reports as an individual.

 

Zhanna

 

P.S. Even though you did seem to have remarkable powers on Friday, it's true that a blind man (or woman—even me! ) could've located that disk with a minimum of searching!

[BeachBum22]

Without some attention to the details—get rid of the "skull" bug, update the database, develop a consistent standard for logging these marks (not necessarily one that's in line with the Geocaching found/not found paradigm)—we're all going to look as amateurish as the U.S. Power Squadron.

 

It's easy to yell at the webmaster when you aren't familiar with what's involved. And please don't forget that all of us aren't trying to look professional....

 

If you click around on the NGS web site, you'll see that they no longer offer benchmark data sheets on CD. This is because you can get them online at the the NGS web site. One county at a time, if you are lucky and the server doesn't time out.....

 

There are 3,000+ counties in the U.S. - so all the webmaster here has to do is download them all, one at a time, and update his database here. Whoppie. That should only take 15 minutes, huh? And when he does that, the good news is that the next day, his data is old because he's obviously not getting updates.

 

The gist of things here lately seems to be that a lot of people are interested in donating information to the NGS, and that's good. But you don't need Geocaching.Com to do that, unless the hidden agenda is that we are really more interested in peer recognition than we are in donating our time and photos to the NGS.

 

Go to the NGS web site and download all the CURRENT data sheets you want, go find the benchmarks, report what you've found with pictures to the NGS, and don't worry about the ones you can't log here.

 

It's really doesn't make sense to use data sheets from anywhere BUT the NGS web site, because they are constantly updated. All GC.com really needs is a list of PID's, and the data sheets could be pulled in real time from the NGS server and would always be current. But I don't think the NGS has a list of PID's on CD either.

 

The job of updating the database here is a lot more time consuming than most people here seem to realize.

 

BeachBum22

http://www.benchmarkhunting.com

Just because I can't find it doesn't mean it's not really there.

[+Rich in NEPA]

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by BeachBum22:

 

It's easy to yell at the webmaster when you aren't familiar with what's involved. And please don't forget that all of us aren't trying to look professional....

---

Two points: 1.) Nobody is yelling at the webmaster, so why exaggerate? 2.) So what, pray tell, is it you're trying to look like if not professional? What's the point of someone submitting accurate recovery reports if it's not to be taken seriously? It seems to me you are saying that those with higher standards should allow themselves to be dragged down to the lowest common denominator because some people aren't interested in or willing to do things in a skillful and thoughtful manner, or who don't care to contribute something of value to a fascinating profession and a growing body of knowledge? The fact is, however, that by maintaining the highest of standards, those of us who are willing to improve and who want to learn will always find a helping hand here.

 

Many of us come here for a sense of community and an opportunity to learn, and yes, maybe a bit of peer recognition. It's the constant interchange of information and opinions that attracts us. You don't get that by being a loner and dealing exclusively with the NGS. Otherwise what's the point of having the benchmarking website in the first place? Why bother going there or to the forums? What started out as a quirky sideline to Geocaching is now struggling to evolve into something of real value—by and for people who recognize it's importance and who want to be a part of it. As for the issues involving updating the database ... where there's a will, there's a way. And if there's a way to make money from it, I'm sure a simple, cost-effective solution will be found. (I, for one, would buy a few benchmark hunting T-shirts, if that's what it takes!)

 

Cheers ...

 

~Rich in NEPA~

 

--- A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ---

[MOCKBA]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rich in NEPA:

the problem with the benchmarking website searches that show Not Founds as destroyed ("skulls") even after a more recent recovery reports it as Found, really needs some _immediate attention_. Administrators, are you listening?!

---

This finally moved me to go and find a 'skull' BM in my area, DALE. While at this, I also noticed another outcrying evidence of the stepchild nature of benchmarking at gc.com. While TopoZone links for *caches* have been updated to rely on WGS84, the benchmarks' TopoZone links still stick to NAD27.

It is plain obvious that TPTB care about physical caches only (virts are getting brushed off the same way as BMs; and today I logged my 1st 'lame virt' on the way to DALE to forcefully make this point).

But we aren't necessarily here because we 100% agree with Jeremy's current take on things. Rather, we are here because we value the results of his past efforts, the database, the interface, and most importantly, the community. Having become a de facto monopolist in collecting meaningful GPS waypoints and the seeking masses, GC.com is essentially a common carrier now. Much like AT&T in the phone business. They should either set aside their idiosyncrasies and support all flavors of caching, or open their databases to the others who will.

[BeachBum22]

....really needs some immediate attention. Administrators, are you listening?! Oh, and does anyone know when the database is going to be updated???

 

Sorry, Rich. I thought the above meant you were "yelling at the webmaster". But English is a second language to me, so maybe I misunderstood it.

 

So what, pray tell, is it you're trying to look like if not professional?

 

We are obviously here for different reasons. I'm not trying to "look like" anything. I don't carry a clipboard or wear my badge from work to try and look "professional" when I'm benchmark hunting. If somebody asks what I'm doing, I don't make up official stories, I simply tell them the truth - that it's one of my hobbies to find and photograph survey markers. I'm having fun finding survey markers, and it doesn't matter to me if they are in the NGS database or not, or if I can log them on this web site or I can't. I'm enjoying learning the basics about benchmarks, that's why I read what's going on here. Not because I want to be a surveyor when I grow up, but so I can explain to the lady who's yard I'm digging up that I'm looking for a tidal benchmark.

 

Benchmark hunting is just a hobby, something to do in my free time, whatever, but certainly not something I would use in the same sentence with the word professional. It fits in with my other hobbies - digital photography, web site design, running around the beach, learning to use a GPS in the boat. That's why I got interested, not because I ever had any aspirations of becoming a professional surveyor.

 

...what's the point of having the benchmarking website in the first place?

 

I assumed it had the same purpose as the Geocaching part of the web site - another activity related to GPS usage and the great outdoors. Another twist for the GPS hobby people to participate in.

 

When I look thru the gallery and read some of the logs, I seem to see different reasons that people log benchmarks here. "It's my first 14'er". From someone who's into mountain climbing. "Found it while looking for the bla bla cache". From somebody who's out looking for Geocaches. So the web site, as is, may not suit your purposes because you are striving to be more professional in your reports, but it definitely suits others, and it's obvious that everyone here (me included) is not striving to be professional. Some of us are just having fun.

 

To be perfectly honest with you, Rich, I enjoyed the brief log and pictures from the top of the 14,000 foot peak a lot more than I enjoy looking at a witness post from four different angles and reading about second order vertical controls and what street names have changed in the last ten years. One sounded like an adventure. The other sounded like a job. I guess I'm just an adventure kinda guy....

 

BeachBum22

http://www.benchmarkhunting.com

Just because I can't find it doesn't mean it's not really there.

[+GeckoGeek]

I think it’s too easy to blame TPTB for anything we don’t like. I have no idea if Jeremy has quit his day job. As someone who already has too many projects going on to get to them in a timely fashion, I’m not about to start pointing fingers.

 

Yes, I want to see improvement, but I also understand economic realities.

[+Rich in NEPA]

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by BeachBum22:

 

I'm not trying to "look like" anything. I don't carry a clipboard or wear my badge from work to try and look "professional" when I'm benchmark hunting.

 

...

 

It fits in with my other hobbies - digital photography, web site design, running around the beach, learning to use a GPS in the boat. That's why I got interested, not because I ever had any aspirations of becoming a professional surveyor.

---

I guess if you want to read about adventures you stick to the adventure magazines. Personally, I prefer to go out and make my own. And nearly every Geocache and benchmark I've hunted as been just that. I treat them as mini-adventures, and I incorporate Geocaching and benchmarking into my other favorite activities—mountain biking, hiking, skiing, photography and my love for the outdoors—wherever and whenever possible. My Geocaching logs tell a bigger story and a lot more about my experiences because I feel a certain obligation to the cache owner who provided me with the opportunity for some fun and a challenge, and I'm sure a lot of other cachers enjoy reading something more than the simple, "Found it. Nice cache. TNLNSL." I even started my benchmark hunting by injecting a little of my personal experiences into my logs, but quickly realized that the two websites are entirely different, in spite of the supposed relationship to Geocaching. I realized that if professionals outside the Geocaching community were someday to find my benchmarking efforts to be of some value, they weren't going to be interested in my personal adventures, but that they'd want me to provide as many of the plain facts as possible. Even if that means making four photographs in each of the cardinal directions. I don't look at it as a job at all, and just because I don't described my entire adventure in minute detail and with the drama of a high adventure, that doesn't mean I'm not enjoying myself to the fullest. I remember every benchmark hunt as fondly as any Geocache hunt I've ever done or any epic mountain bike ride, if not more so. I think we agree on this aspect, at least.

 

Let's face it, like most techno-geeks, we buy these high-tech toys and then look for a reason to play with them and to rationalize the expense of owning them. Eventually they evolve into everyday appliances that through their unbiquity we find we can't live without. But in the meantime Geocaching, and subsequently benchmarking, provides GPS users with the proverbial "problem to their solution." (Just like balancing your checkbook and organizing your recipes was at one time justification for owning a personal computer. I was in on the ground floor in the mid-70's so I've seen first hand how this happens.)

 

When I say that we should strive to be "professional" my intent is that we should not settle for doing things half-assed, but doing them in a professional manner. Nobody said anything about becoming professional surveyors (although I'm sure that a few who have gotten bitten by the benchmark bug are finding out that they have a certain real inclination to make a career out of it). It's painfully obvious that you're missing the point entirely. It's about standards. If you actually read my previous post you'd see that's what I'm trying to get at. I've already seen Geocaching get dumbed down, sanitized, sterilized, and the creativity and innovation sucked out of it now that it's become a mainstream activity for the masses. This de-evolution has turned me off almost completely. I'd hate to see the same things happen to benchmarking, and at least I'm trying to help prevent it, if only by speaking out a little at first.

 

Cheers ...

 

~Rich in NEPA~

 

--- A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ---

[+DustyJacket]

I do agree that reporting a "not found" to the NGS should only be done in special circumstances. Like when the has been recent construction and the area has been totally gone over.

 

I do not agree that the Power Squadron "sucks". The USPS does a lot of good work. But, their "area" is boating and that is where the USPS shines.

 

DustyJacket

Not all those that wander are lost. But in my case...

[+Rich in NEPA]

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by DustyJacket:

 

I do not agree that the Power Squadron "sucks". The USPS does a lot of good work. But, their "area" is boating and that is where the USPS shines.

---

The subject line was more or less meant to attract attention, but the fact remains that this sort of thing is quite common for the USPS and has been discussed before. What exactly is the motive for making official NGS reports when it's so readily apparent that little if any effort was put into the search. And that sucks.

 

Cheers ...

 

~Rich in NEPA~

 

--- A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ---

[JamesAG]

I believe my professionalism, or better, my responsibility, is to be as accurate as possible with my findings and my research. But I don't consider that I have to log my findings in a manner that will acceptable to NGS. Yes, they should be to the point and helpful, but I personally think a log that simply gives mark position information would make this hobby too sterilized. I like being able to 'tell a tale' about what it took to find mark and I would get very frustrated if I couldn't. Who else can I tell? My wife and kids and my co-workers aren't usually interested.

 

One of the things I like about the Benchmark set-up here on GC.com is that all of us can conduct BM hunting in our own way. One person can simply find a mark and list it as found and the next guy can make a full report to NGS, on the exact same mark. Neither person is affected by the others method and there is no harm to the 'sanctity' of the mark.

 

Personally I don't ever plan on making a report to NGS. Why? Because it is my viewpoint that I am not doing anything that a surveyor couldn't do. It is my viewpoint that they don't need me to tell them that a water tower is gone or that a disc is still there. I am certainly not knocking anybody who wants to make reports to NGS. That information is helpful to surveyors, it's just not my goal to help them. If it is your goal, I say great! go for it. I'm here for the enjoyment of the effort it takes to find a mark. So if someone thinks I owe something to NGS or GC.com, and that we should only be making GC.com logs at NGS standards, I would have to disagree. I can't believe the point of benchmark hunting on GC.com was so that NGS could have current information. It can be used to help NGS, but I can't believe it was the primary purpose.

 

Now back on topic,

Do I think that GC.com should lose the skulls on data that shows it found at a later date? Yes I do. Personally I think the skulls should be removed on all marks and list everything together.

Do I think that USPS has made incorrect reports to NGS? Absolutely. I've found a couple errors myself.

Should skulls entries that were found by us, with no later found date, be reported to NGS? Well I hate to say it, but right now I wouldn't report it to them. Someone will have to convince me that I should. I am willing to consider it, but I don't want to be another one of those over-zealous amateurs.

 

[This message was edited by dgarner on September 15, 2003 at 07:58 AM.]

[+Thack Pack]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rich in NEPA:

 

...but the fact remains that this sort of thing is quite common for the USPS and has been discussed before. What exactly is the motive for making official NGS reports when it's so readily apparent that little if any effort was put into the search.

---

 

I would like to add my recent find to the list. GW1698

[BeachBum22]

I see your point, Rich, and I understand what you'd like to see happen with benchmark hunting. But from what I see here, I'm not sure this is the place to try and make it happen.

 

I don't know why GC.com was born. But I can guess. Probably one of two reasons. Either the person who owns the web site was an avid Geocacher and it was born for fun, or it was born in the hopes of making a profit. Nothing wrong with either motivation, but web sites that are born for fun and discovered by the masses quickly turn into a financial burden because internet bandwidth, P4 boxes, software, and programming time aren't free. So unless the owner is financially independent, the only way to keep them going is to attract more of the masses in the hope of generating the funding necessary to do so. The "fun" quickly turns into a "job" when the masses arrive. And we all know what usually happens to standards when the masses show up....

 

I'm not sure the owner of this web site was ever interested in benchmark hunting, my guess would be that the limited section devoted to it was put here in an effort to attract a few more people in the hopes they would help support the bandwidth.

 

The database is two or three years old. The information here about benchmarks (other than what's in this forum) is very limited. In the short time I've been here, I've seen a number of things in this forum addressed to the "admin" of the web site, but I've not seen one posting from them in response.

 

Yes, there is a small group of people here who are obviously interested in "standards" and "professionalism" but I seriously doubt the owner of the web site (and the majority of benchmark loggers) are included in that group.

 

I think the submission of reports to the NGS and submission of benchmark logs to GC.com are two vastly different things, and I also think that if you attempt to apply the NGS standards here it will disperse the masses, not attract them.

 

When I suggested you use the current NGS datasheets and do your logging there, I wasn't suggesting that you become the Lone Ranger of Benchmark Hunting, I was trying to say that the NGS web site is the only place currently available where standards and professionalism apply. But I still feel that a four page recovery log and eight pictures of an orange rock would put the even the most professional of surveyors to sleep.

 

We are definitely both on the same wavelength when it comes to Geocaching - if I want to find a thousand plastic 35mm film canisters, I'll go look in the garbage can in the photo department at Walmart, not out in the woods.

 

Good luck with getting the "admin" interested.

 

BeachBum22

http://www.benchmarkhunting.com

Just because I can't find it doesn't mean it's not really there.

[+w5waf]

I'm a bit concerned over the accuracy of the USPS finds. I noticed one that was marked as a "find" when I know for a fact that the benchmark was destroyed several years ago.

[BeachBum22]

The USPS isn't the only group who doesn't find things. This benchmark was "not found and presumed destroyed" by the Florida Department of Natural Resources, but then found later. Lucky for me, whoever it was that DID find it added a nice witness post which made it really easy for me to find....

 

It's hard to fault any "not found" reports because you don't know what the conditions and surroundings were ten years ago when someone else didn't find it. That's probably why the NGS has such strict rules concerning "destroyed" benchmarks.

 

BeachBum22

http://www.benchmarkhunting.com

Just because I can't find it doesn't mean it's not really there.

[Max Cacher]

Originally posted by Rich in NEPA:

the problem with the benchmarking website searches that show Not Founds as destroyed ("skulls") even after a more recent recovery reports it as Found, really needs some _immediate attention_. Administrators, are you listening?!

 

Yes we are listening. TG

[+Rich in NEPA]

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tennessee Geocacher:

 

Yes we are listening. TG

---

Thanks. It's nice to be reassured every once in while.

 

Cheers ...

 

~Rich in NEPA~

 

--- A man with a GPS receiver knows where he is; a man with two GPS receivers is never sure. ---

[AE5D]

Going back to your original post... you reminded me of a benchmark I found (CS2926) which had been reported as "Not Found" by USPS, even though it was directly under a witness post.

 

It is especially rewarding to find a marker that someone else couldn't find. This category includes CS1841 and CS1845, which were "Not Found" by NGS in 1986, but I found them both easily.

[RACooper]

BM0154

 

BM0147

 

Well, there are two more missed by USPSQD. However, they're not the only ones who miss markers...

AX0221

 

The main mark MONA 1954 was listed as Not Found by LOCENG, and the same entry indicated that MONA RM1 had been moved. However, if you overlay the 1985 measurements (SE and NE) to the original 1954 cardinal directions (N and E), they apparently end up in the same location. I also have to guess that the church has been expanded since the original monumenting, because the 107 feet given "NW of the NW corner of the church" puts you almost in the FM road now, but the mark still measures very close to original from RM1. (now, of course I could be making assumptions, but that's how it logically lays out to me...)