Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
zookeepertx

Should I report this station as destroyed?

Recommended Posts

I found my VERY FIRST Benchmarks today! I'm so proud! I went to look for 3 & found 2, so that's not a bad ratio. One of them - CR1213 - was easy because the homeowner at the location knew right where it was. As we walked back for him to show us, he was telling us that, years ago, some people had come looking for this one & another nearby. They found them both & told him that they were supposed to collect them & bring them in; he didn't know any different. They proceeded to dig up the other one, beat the concrete off of it & take it! They would have taken this one, too, but they couldn't get it dug up. Later on he got to thinking about it & contacted someone (he thinks it was the USGS) who, of course, told him that these should never be moved at all, but it was too late.

 

One of the notations in CR1213 mentions Triangulation Station Disk/Benchmark CR1212 that should be 119.99 ft SSE of CR1213 & the man said that would put it right about where those people took the other one from. He even showed me a piece of the concrete that they had tossed aside in the bushes!

 

As far as I can tell, there are no other Benchmarks remotely near this location, so should I report CR1212 as being destroyed? Thanks for any suggestions!

Share this post


Link to post

The current NGS data sheet for CR1212 has a 2004 report that says "PRESUMED DESTROYED". According to the story you got, the report may have stated the wrong reasons, but at least they appear to have the right conclusion.

 

Also, at many times and places a triangulation station had an underground disk set with a concrete post and surface disk over it. Some might not indicate on the data sheet that there was such an underground mark. If this was one of those cases, the station might still be recoverable.

 

Since you don't have hard evidence (like a picture of the actual disk out of position), you probably couldn't get it marked destroyed anyway.

Edited by Bill93

Share this post


Link to post

The current NGS data sheet for CR1212 has a 2004 report that says "PRESUMED DESTROYED". According to the story you got, the report may have stated the wrong reasons, but at least they appear to have the right conclusion.

 

Also, at many times and places a triangulation station had an underground disk set with a concrete post and surface disk over it. Some might not indicate on the data sheet that there was such an underground mark. If this was one of those cases, the station might still be recoverable.

 

Since you don't have hard evidence (like a picture of the actual disk out of position), you probably couldn't get it marked destroyed anyway.

Okay, thanks for the information. I just logged a note saying what the homeowner told me, but not as destroyed. Maybe I'll go back & try to see if there's an underground disk set one of these days.

Edited by zookeepertx

Share this post


Link to post

zookeepertx,

 

Your log does a very good job of explaining the situation. The "Write Note" option was a good choice for this one in my opinion. Congratulations on your first three searches!

Share this post


Link to post

zookeepertx,

 

Your log does a very good job of explaining the situation. The "Write Note" option was a good choice for this one in my opinion. Congratulations on your first three searches!

Thanks! It was fun! The homeowner was amused, I think, at someone being excited & taking a picture of the concrete & disk that's been in his yard forever, LOL! He felt really bad that the other one got taken "on his watch", so to speak, but he really didn't know any better. And they told him some official-sounding organization that they were supposedly from, so it sounded legit to him.

 

How do notes such as the one that Bill93 pointed out saying the station was "presumed destroyed" get onto the NGS data sheets?

Share this post


Link to post

How do notes such as the one that Bill93 pointed out saying the station was "presumed destroyed" get onto the NGS data sheets?

 

People can submit official recovery reports through the NGS website or their DSWorld program. They are often done by surveyors, but another group that did benchmark hunting in the past (US Power Squadron) is some sort of boating association. And there is a special code (GEOCAC) for Geocachers to use when doing official recovery reports. The NGS does recovery reports at times too. I personally haven't done any official reports yet, mostly because I lost the documentation I had on some stations I particularly wanted to report. (One of which was very obviously destroyed.)

Share this post


Link to post

We'd like to cast a vote against trying to excavate the underground mark, unless you can arrange to do so in the presence, or with the help, of a licensed professional. It's the very last mark for the point, so disturbing it is totally destructive of the point. Back in the day, a missing surface mark that couldn't be restored by the reference marks could be restored by carefully digging down to the underground mark, and then putting over the hole a device called a plumbing bench. This had legs that could be sturdily planted, like the legs of a tripod, and a plumb-bob hook in the horizontal part that could be slid around and locked in place with thumbscrews or the like. So the plumb bob was centered over the underground mark, the hook was locked in place, and the hole was very carefully filled (don't bump that bench!) to accommodate the new surface disk, whose position could be made exact by re-hanging the plumb bob. Such restoration is now a lot easier with instruments, but our guess is that it's rarely if ever done any more.

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post

Seems I spoke (or posted) too soon and forgot I'd logged that destroyed benchmark on this site, so while the original image files are gone the Geocaching.com copies still exist. Now this I imagine would warrant a surface mark destroyed recovery report. Don't know if a mark like this would have an underground mark.

 

2245a8db-a951-42c3-9fde-206599d511f2.jpg

http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/ds_mark.prl?PidBox=AB4079

http://www.geocaching.com/mark/details.aspx?PID=AB4079

Share this post


Link to post

We'd like to cast a vote against trying to excavate the underground mark, unless you can arrange to do so in the presence, or with the help, of a licensed professional. It's the very last mark for the point, so disturbing it is totally destructive of the point. Back in the day, a missing surface mark that couldn't be restored by the reference marks could be restored by carefully digging down to the underground mark, and then putting over the hole a device called a plumbing bench. This had legs that could be sturdily planted, like the legs of a tripod, and a plumb-bob hook in the horizontal part that could be slid around and locked in place with thumbscrews or the like. So the plumb bob was centered over the underground mark, the hook was locked in place, and the hole was very carefully filled (don't bump that bench!) to accommodate the new surface disk, whose position could be made exact by re-hanging the plumb bob. Such restoration is now a lot easier with instruments, but our guess is that it's rarely if ever done any more.

 

Cheers,

I agree. It should be noted that underground mark is not always the same type as the surface mark. For instance, we found where someone actually dug out the underground mark looking for it and they did not even realize it because they assumed it was a disk. We went there to reestablish the postion as part of one of our surveys and found the underground mark among stones piled around the mark. They thought it was just another rock in the ground. We had the USFS notes as to the field work done. Btw-UG mark was a copper bolt set in a a round piece of concrete that really looked like a rock and the bolt was not visible at first glance but experience of the NGS advisor cautioned us to be aware of that. Another thing about UG marks, they are RARELY as deep as they are supposed to be. Seems some field workers were lazy and dug a hole shallow. We found an a uprooted post once that was only about 30 inches long and the desc had it 6 or 8 inces about goung, we found the mark about 2 ft below the surface. So its easy to dig up if you are unaware of these things, that took many yrs experience to learn. Leave the UG mark there.

 

RL1102 STATION RECOVERY (1995)

RL1102

RL1102'RECOVERY NOTE BY MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1995 (BRT)

RL1102'MARK WAS FOUND REPLACED WITH AN IRON PIPE FROM REFERENCE MONUMENTS BY

RL1102'RICHARD L. DRAHN, US FOREST SERVICE, UNDERGROUND MARK WAS FOUND PILED

RL1102'IN STONES SURROUNDING FOREST SERVICE PIPE. PER INSTRUCTIONS FROM NGS

RL1102'STATE GEODETIC ADVISOR THE USFS MARK WAS REMOVED AND A NEW STATION WAS

RL1102'ESTABLISHED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT STATE GEODETIC ADVISOR.

Edited by Z15

Share this post


Link to post

Seems I spoke (or posted) too soon and forgot I'd logged that destroyed benchmark on this site, so while the original image files are gone the Geocaching.com copies still exist. Now this I imagine would warrant a surface mark destroyed recovery report. Don't know if a mark like this would have an underground mark.

Usually rods like this do not have underground marks, as the rods should be "driven to refusal". Since your rod isn't there, only the casing, it's extremely possible that the rod is *still in the ground*, covered up (and probably bent)! :)

Share this post


Link to post

Seems I spoke (or posted) too soon and forgot I'd logged that destroyed benchmark on this site, so while the original image files are gone the Geocaching.com copies still exist. Now this I imagine would warrant a surface mark destroyed recovery report. Don't know if a mark like this would have an underground mark.

Usually rods like this do not have underground marks, as the rods should be "driven to refusal". Since your rod isn't there, only the casing, it's extremely possible that the rod is *still in the ground*, covered up (and probably bent)! :)

 

As I believe that the mark was disturbed during gas line construction, I imagine the rod was probably pulled up too and probably scrapped. (Google Street View shows the area the mark would have been in to be dug up quite a bit.) I figure the casing was left behind due partly to it's weight and a lack of interest in trying to recycle it. Though I suppose it could also have been left behind as evidence that the mark is gone. (And it's probably still there, from what I recall of the location I doubt most people would bother it.)

Share this post


Link to post

As I believe that the mark was disturbed during gas line construction, I imagine the rod was probably pulled up too and probably scrapped. (Google Street View shows the area the mark would have been in to be dug up quite a bit.) I figure the casing was left behind due partly to it's weight and a lack of interest in trying to recycle it. Though I suppose it could also have been left behind as evidence that the mark is gone. (And it's probably still there, from what I recall of the location I doubt most people would bother it.)

Ah! Okay, I stand corrected then. I didn't realize the entire area was ripped up. I thought it was just surface disturbance. :)

Share this post


Link to post

Seems I spoke (or posted) too soon and forgot I'd logged that destroyed benchmark on this site, so while the original image files are gone the Geocaching.com copies still exist. Now this I imagine would warrant a surface mark destroyed recovery report. Don't know if a mark like this would have an underground mark.

Usually rods like this do not have underground marks, as the rods should be "driven to refusal". Since your rod isn't there, only the casing, it's extremely possible that the rod is *still in the ground*, covered up (and probably bent)! :)

 

As I believe that the mark was disturbed during gas line construction, I imagine the rod was probably pulled up too and probably scrapped. (Google Street View shows the area the mark would have been in to be dug up quite a bit.) I figure the casing was left behind due partly to it's weight and a lack of interest in trying to recycle it. Though I suppose it could also have been left behind as evidence that the mark is gone. (And it's probably still there, from what I recall of the location I doubt most people would bother it.)

 

From the looks of the picture showing the concrete and tube, it appears as though the area where the rod would normally be located has Not been disturbed. Most of that type, that we have recovered are right at the fence line and that fence line looks undisturbed.

 

Perhaps another visit to where the datasheet says it should be located is in order to verify that the area has been disturbed and that the rod con not be located.

 

John

Share this post


Link to post

 

From the looks of the picture showing the concrete and tube, it appears as though the area where the rod would normally be located has Not been disturbed. Most of that type, that we have recovered are right at the fence line and that fence line looks undisturbed.

 

Perhaps another visit to where the datasheet says it should be located is in order to verify that the area has been disturbed and that the rod con not be located.

 

John

 

When I was actually at the site I thought the mark had been dug up by the farmer from the other side of the fence (there was a small area of disturbed looking earth) but, as I had seen signs that seemed to indicate gas pipeline work in the not too distant past in the area, I tried taking a look at Google Street View and this is what I saw:

 

u483streetview.jpg

 

The datasheet says the mark was 1.3 feet North of the fence. While I'm not an expert at judging distances, I would think that would put it in the disturbed area in the pic. Assuming the fence line hasn't moved.

 

As far as a return visit, that area is about 1000 miles away and I don't own a car. While it's possible I might get down there again, it won't likely be till winter at the earliest. Even if I was there, the mark only had scaled coordinates (which are on the wrong side of the street entirely) so I have no way to actually locate the rod if it was still in place. (Even if it had adjusted coordinates, all I have at the moment is an older model smartphone and it's not that great a GPS. Though that might change later this year.)

 

Now if there's anyone in the Gulf Shores, AL area that wants to check it out that might be able to figure out where it should be from the description, then that would be different.

Share this post


Link to post

We'd like to cast a vote against trying to excavate the underground mark, unless you can arrange to do so in the presence, or with the help, of a licensed professional. It's the very last mark for the point, so disturbing it is totally destructive of the point. Back in the day, a missing surface mark that couldn't be restored by the reference marks could be restored by carefully digging down to the underground mark, and then putting over the hole a device called a plumbing bench. This had legs that could be sturdily planted, like the legs of a tripod, and a plumb-bob hook in the horizontal part that could be slid around and locked in place with thumbscrews or the like. So the plumb bob was centered over the underground mark, the hook was locked in place, and the hole was very carefully filled (don't bump that bench!) to accommodate the new surface disk, whose position could be made exact by re-hanging the plumb bob. Such restoration is now a lot easier with instruments, but our guess is that it's rarely if ever done any more.

 

Cheers,

Ah, okay. Thanks for the information! I'll leave it be then. Since I've only just started looking for Bench marks, I'd hate to make the damage worse because of my inexperience! Thank you for letting me know the particulars.

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

×
×
  • Create New...