Multi-part benchmark - what determines found.

[rusty0101]

I hope to find all of the marker components for pp2723, but I do have a question about it. The description identifies a Traverse Station Disk, two Reference Mark Disks, and an Azimuth Mark Disk.

 

While I do hope to find all four disks, what would be considered a find? If the TSD is not there, but both the RMDs and or the AMD are as described, is it a find? Shouldn't this be considered four descreet markers?

 

-Rusty

[+Dawgies]

is the mark.

 

All others are just fun additives!

 

 

~Honest Value Never Fails~

[+Kewaneh & Shark]

From the data sheet"

 

Marker Type: traverse station disk

Setting: set into the top of a round concrete monument

Stability: May hold, but of type commonly subject to surface motion.

Designation: RIDGEDALE

 

Acording to this, the traverse station is the disk you're looking for. Surveyors commonly use other physical features as ties to help locate a particular monument or other point. Sometimes if there are not other features to use, the surveyor may set other brass caps to use. (Or maybe he just likes setting brass caps.) The reference marks are there to help locate the actual benchmark - the traverse station disk.

 

Keep on Caching!

- Kewaneh

[+Black Dog Trackers]

In the game of benchmark hunting, I consider finding any reference mark associated with a staton as a find to log, even if I can't find the main station. I figure the purpose of reference marks is to be able to find the main station or perhaps to use instead of it when it's gone.

 

The website allows one log of a find for PID. If you feel like looking for the reference marks (I usually do), you will be finding them with no further 'credit'. I like to find them anyway.

[+OzzieSan]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Black Dog Trackers:

In the game of benchmark hunting, I consider finding any reference mark associated with a staton as a find to log, even if I can't find the main station. I figure the purpose of reference marks is to be able to find the main station or perhaps to use instead of it when it's gone.

---

 

If you dont find the "main station" how can you log it as a find? A ref mark is not the station mark and as you stated ref marks are used to aid in the location of the listed station. If the ref mark does not have a PID it should not be logged as a find.

 

It would be like doing a multi-stage cache and logging the cache found after finding only one of the stages.

[survey tech]

Reference marks and azimuth marks are very important and should be respected just as much as any other markers, but they are technically just accessories to the true station mark. For geocaching purposes, finding any one of them might be considered acceptable verification that the geocacher was in the right area, but for official purposes it would be very misleading to report that a triangulation station was found without having seen the actual tri-station marker.

[rusty0101]

For safety reasons I am not going to find the actual mark. After reading the description, and observing the location, I do not think that it would be advisable to photograph the actual benchmark, or for that matter make an accurate observation.

 

The Transit Station Disk is on the shoulder of what is now I-394. The traffic level may be low enough to visit this disk some time after midnight, but I can not envision any time during the day that it would be safe to spend time at it. Additionally there is a 45-60 degree slope to the immediate south of the disk, (expaining the safety rail described) which drops down approximately 30' to a service road. There is a fence separating them as well.

 

All in all, I do not think this would be a safe mark to "find" for an amature. On top of that the Mall that is on the other side of the service road houses both mall security and one of the city's police stations. My understanding is that unless I have a permit, and follow OSHA regulations, visiting this benchmark would violate some law.

 

With regards to the reference marks, The first reference mark as far as I can tell is in a fenced off area marked private property. I can (and possibly will) check with the mall people to see if they are the right people to allow access.

 

Reference Mark 2 is where it is described, with the understanding that the building is currently unocupied, and the signs marking the building as described have been reversed (plexiglass sign painted with the business name, turned so that the writing faces the wall, but if you can read upside down writing, it can be made out.)

 

Once I have the film developed and scanned, I will post pictures of that, but will indicate that the Mark is still "unfound".

 

There are a couple of other marks that I will look for in the next couple of days that I expect to be significantly easier to find.

 

-Rusty

[+Black Dog Trackers]

OK, knowing a bit more about reference marks, I take it they are useless without the triangulation station and we should not report a find without finding the actual triangulation station instead of just finding the reference mark(s) and/or azimuth mark. (However, as I stated in another thread, it's unfortunate that the geocaching site's benchmark index will show no indication at all of any note without someone punching the "find" radio button.)

 

I haven't yet posted any finds where I've found only the reference or aziumth mark except in the one case in which I found the station's mounument and metal shank, but with the cap pried off. (For that PID, I found a reference mark intact and haven't had time to search for its aziumth mark yet.) In this case, I clearly described the situation in my report to the geocaching site and provided a picture as well.

 

So far, I haven't reported anything at all to the NGS, wanting to be more experienced and knowlegeable first.

[russotto]

I count it as a find if I find any of the reference marks or obvious mark locations (e.g. a decapitated one where the disk imprint is visible in the concrete). In one case I found a reference marker and a witness post, with the mark (and the other RM) now below ground level. It'd get much less fun if I had to dig it up to count it.

 

I didn't count one where I found the witness post (just the post, not the label) but no disk.

[+Black Dog Trackers]

russotto -

 

Well, I've been told in this thread that only finding the main station should be considered as a find. I did think the same as you, but hearing that the reference disks and azimuth disks are of no value to surveying without the main disk, finding any of them without finding the main station isn't really a useful find.

 

Also, if another geocacher follows you and does manage to find the main station, then that person should get the first find at that PID.

 

I do agree though, that finding the shank and cement scar of the main station should be considerd a find even it the cap has been removed.

 

Today I found the station missing and only found its azimuth mark disk. So, I did not log it as a find - I put a note instead. Maybe someone else will come along and find the main disk and then log it as a find

[survey tech]

The reference and azimuth marks can be used by professionals to reset the true station, so it is incorrect to say they have no value. In some cases they can also be upgraded to replace the tri-station if circumstances warrant. Once again, it is important to show them the respect they deserve and not create the impression that they are disposable.

[+Black Dog Trackers]

survey tech -

 

I think a lot of us are wanting to have some kind of logical standard of benchmark finding with the geocaching site based on a possible use to the surveying community.

 

Some PIDs have just one disk (or marker of some other kind), whereas other PIDs have a group of markers under the one PID; a main (whatever it's called) station, with one or more reference marks, azimuth mark, and possibly an underground station.

 

In your opinion, should:

 

1: finding any marker (disk or other official marker) in the PID's group be considered a 'find' in terms of the geocaching website, or

 

2: only if the main station is found should a 'find' in terms of the geocaching website be registerd

 

?

 

I don't really care either way, but I think we're looking for a standard here and value guidance from a member of the professional community.

 

Whichever of the above two standards we end up adopting, we would still be including our text descriptions of exactly what we found, and what we failed to find, and fully respect any markers that still exist.

[+Web-ling]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Team 5-oh!:

If you dont find the "main station" how can you log it as a find? A ref mark is not the station mark and as you stated ref marks are used to aid in the location of the listed station. If the ref mark does not have a PID it should not be logged as a find.

 

It would be like doing a multi-stage cache and logging the cache found after finding only one of the stages.

---

However, benchmarks aren't geocaches. Benchmark hunting is an entirely different game.

 

Using your comparison, if a multi-cache has one stage come up missing, the cache owner will either replace the stage or archive the cache. With benchmarks, there's nobody to maintain them. If a mark turns up missing, it's just gone. It isn't even usually archived. Therefore, I think it's fair enough to log a find at this website if ANY of the disks are located, especially if a thorough search was done for the main disk, and the hunter is reasonably sure the disk just isn't there any more. HOWEVER, I wouldn't log it at the NGS website.

 

[+WaldenRun]

If someone sees a 'found' log for me on a benchmark, I want them to know the main station is available for them to find. Hopefully, there will always be a picture of the disk (or whatever) with the designation readable.

 

"Why worry when you can obsess?"

[+rogbarn]

I agree with Walden Run. If I find the main disk, then it's a find. If I find the hole where the disk used to be, that's OK. If I can't find a sign of the main disk, then it's a not found even if I do find reference and/or azimuth disks. If I find the witness post and/or other reference markers that suggest the disk is right there, but I can't see the disk, then it's a not found. Also, if the benchmark is a spire, dome, steeple, chimney etc and the building is torn down, then it's a not found. I've seen many like this that are logged as found, I guess the thinking is that they found the spot where it used to be. But, if it's torn down, it's no longer useful to the surveyor.

[+Black Dog Trackers]

My inclination on this, as can be seen from my earlier posts on this thread, is on the side with web-ling. To me a multi-disk PID is like a family and if you find one member of it, it's a find.

 

A witness post is certainly not a useful find in itself and I definitely agree that a former tower is not a find.

 

But I'd like to go with a standard here and will change all my finds/notes one way or the other when we figure it out.