Jump to content

Are these destroyed?


DukeOfURL01

Recommended Posts

In my recent adventures, I have found a few that I think are destroyed. Tell me if you agree. Should I report them to Deb as Destroyed along with the photo to back it up?

 

DSCN2922.jpg

KS1902 - This is a picture of where it was, but it was a locally famous tower that came down on 8/27/10

 

DSCN2828.jpg

KS1126 - Where it should have been, at the site of an old airport that doesn't exist anymore.

 

Tell me what you think.

Link to comment

Deb recently clarified that she would prefer to receive no reports of any kind concerning intersection stations such as KS1902. If you found the displaced disk from KS1126 then you could send a photo to Deb to have it classified as destroyed, otherwise the convention is to report it as not found.

Edited by tosborn
Link to comment

Actually, if you use a metal detector, it is not so rare to find a displaced disk--if you are alert to the possibility that it still is in the vicinity. Mowing equipment can throw a chunk of brass a considerable distance. I've found one at 10 feet out, and two were about 20 feet from the monument. Interestingly, in these three cases, a DESTROYED status was not justified because the stems were still in the monuments and had the potential to be used by surveyors.

 

If you are a long-time reader of this Forum, you can tune out now, because what follows is a soap box I've been on numerous times in the past.

 

Processing a DESTROYED report is a very labor-intensive exercise for NGS, where resources already are stretched. In most cases, there is no value in getting a mark "off of the active map", and there can be harmful consequences. I've pointed out before that finding 100-year-old markers along state lines involves reading data sheets for conventional markers, which often contain the only clues to the location of a granite monument. I have a dozen cases which I've published in the forum in the past five years--including several examples where a well-meaning geocaching.com individual submitted destruction reports simply to "clean up the data base".

 

It has been argued that the "destroyed" data sheets still can be viewed. That is true, but ONLY IF YOU KNOW TO LOOK FOR IT. If the mark is "off the active map" and does not show up in the "results" of a geographical search, how would one know that the data sheet existed? Be very cautious before asking Deb to mark a station as DESTROYED--especially if the data sheet contains references to any other marks.

Monday morning, I was in Virginia, looking for MOTLEY 2 (FY0800) and its reference marks. The most recent NGS update was in 1983, and I suspected the description might need updating. The box score in the NGS data sheet lists two reference marks and an azimuth mark. There are bearings, but no distances. However, I noticed that the original station was referenced, also.

 

Knowing of its existence, I was able to find and print the data sheet for MOTLEY (FY0799), which contained bearings and distances for all but the newest reference mark. The old values were no longer valid for searching, because the station has been reset in a new location. However, I was able to use the NGS FORWARD program to calculate the coordinates of the reference marks, based upon the info in the original data sheet. I also learned from the original data sheet that one of the reference marks had been destroyed by grading. Having the old data in hand made the task a lot easier!

 

Later that morning, I ran across yet another example of a conventional triangulation station which includs a granite meridian marker in its description. In this case, the meridian has been assigned a PID and its data sheet is published. That's how we hope the old stones are identified. But it often is not the case.

 

Summary: It is okay to mark a station as DESTROYED on geocaching.com. However, don't send destruction reports to NGS for YOUR convenience or satisfaction. Always report with the real audience in mind--the professional surveyors, for whom this is NOT a hobby.

 

Best regards,

-Paul-

Link to comment

DUKE & all,

 

My vote is with Paul. I have also found clues in a DATASHEET of a mark/station that is likely no longer there and these clues helped in the recovery of a nearby PID. Paul's point that positive evidence of where the mark/station had been may be adequate for professional use is worth noting. Many BM's are given to the tenth of a foot and the top a RR abutment with even just a portion of the disk recess remaining may be all that is needed.

 

I would go a bit further and advocate for the deletion of the DESTROYED option in GEOCACHE. Post a note detailing your search and the reason that you decided that it is gone.

 

kayakbird

Link to comment

I disagree with Paul and kayakbird. I guess it is my IT background, but when something is gone I want it marked as gone and off the "active list". I treat Not Found reports as challenges, not as Not Found, and I look for them all. A Destroyed mark has been proven to be destroyed (yes, I know there are marks that have been brought back from the dead, but they are small fragment of destroyed marks).

 

I am not sure what is so difficult about getting information from the destroyed marks' datasheets--they still exist, you just need to look them up by PID or include destoryed marks on a datasheet extract. Am I missing something?

Link to comment

I have the IT background too, and am thinking like mloser,

 

Hmm, I think what I'll do is mark it destroyed with Geocaching, but DNF to NGS. When I mark it as DNF to NGS, I think it's safe to comment in the log that I'm pretty sure it's gone, but I'm marking it as DNF anyhow.

 

Sound good?

Link to comment

I have the IT background too, and am thinking like mloser,

 

Hmm, I think what I'll do is mark it destroyed with Geocaching, but DNF to NGS. When I mark it as DNF to NGS, I think it's safe to comment in the log that I'm pretty sure it's gone, but I'm marking it as DNF anyhow.

 

Sound good?

 

That's fine for the disk (assuming you feel you did put forth enough effort to find it, and still failed,) but don't submit anything for the tower because, as tosborn mentioned, the NGS has said they don't want any reports at all for intersection stations.

Link to comment
I am not sure what is so difficult about getting information from the destroyed marks' datasheets--they still exist, you just need to look them up by PID or include destoryed marks on a datasheet extract. Am I missing something?

 

I agree about being able to get the destroyed mark's datasheet--IF you know to look for it. But I'm curious to find out if some of you have a resource I have not discovered. Specifically, my problem is that I don't understand how I could know that a DESTROYED mark's datasheet referenced the target object. What is the secret to knowing that there is a potentially useful datasheet buried in the archive, and how would I know the PID?

 

The references to old monuments often are slipped into the descriptive text of stations, with no other indication being present. See DG7593 (in the NGS database) as an example. If that datasheet were to be marked DESTROYED, how would anyone in the future know that NC-VA Marker Number 28.5 ever existed?

 

-Paul-

Link to comment
The references to old monuments often are slipped into the descriptive text of stations, with no other indication being present. See DG7593 (in the NGS database) as an example. If that datasheet were to be marked DESTROYED, how would anyone in the future know that NC-VA Marker Number 28.5 ever existed?

 

By going to the Raduis Search Form (or any other normal search form), performing your search, but either clicking "Browse Mode" checkbox, OR selecting "Data Type Desired" option "Destroyed Marks Only". :)

Link to comment

Good point about the search, Mike. I always click "Include Destroyed Marks", and then I call each one up, individually. (Even though this is time-consuming, I sometimes hit Pay Dirt.)

 

I appreciate the comments of everyone in this thread. My feeling remains that we should submit destruction reports with caution, and only when there is a clear benefit in doing so. To borrow a phrase from the Medical profession: "Do no harm."; and from the business world, "Never let the value of an action be exceeded by the cost of accomplishing it." :rolleyes:

 

Thanks to Tosborn and Rotareng for the reminder that Deb does not want reports of any kind for aerial intersection stations--whether recoveries, or destruction notices.

 

-Paul-

 

Link to comment

Good point about the search, Mike. I always click "Include Destroyed Marks", and then I call each one up, individually. (Even though this is time-consuming, I sometimes hit Pay Dirt.)

 

I appreciate the comments of everyone in this thread. My feeling remains that we should submit destruction reports with caution, and only when there is a clear benefit in doing so. To borrow a phrase from the Medical profession: "Do no harm."; and from the business world, "Never let the value of an action be exceeded by the cost of accomplishing it." :rolleyes:

 

Thanks to Tosborn and Rotareng for the reminder that Deb does not want reports of any kind for aerial intersection stations--whether recoveries, or destruction notices.

 

-Paul-

 

 

As crazy as this sounds, I'll add a bit of a trick I learned while searching -

 

Something I noticed on Google Earth was that on leveling lines (I believe?), many many times the PIDs are sequential. For example (these PIDs/Designs made up for this example):

JV1001 - A 101

JV1002 - B 101

JV1003 - C 101

 

And so on. However, when looking at the whole line, you may see something like:

JV1001 - A 101

JV1003 - C 101

With JV1002 missing on Google Earth (or any visual representation of them, like Scardycat's site). You'll notice that a sequential number is missing. That's sometimes useful to know, you can manually look up JV1002 (you could already guess it's "B 101") and now know that there's a destroyed mark out there.

 

I sometimes purposefully look for missing sequential numbers - especially when I'l tracing old US Highway routes and am trying to find an original ROW for the road.

 

--Mike.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...