Datasheet isn't loading properly

[cesariojpn]

I've been trying to access this particular datasheet to see if NGS has updated it with my recovery, but it seems to just stop and give out garbled lines. Is anyone able to get the thing to load fully?

 

http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/ds_mark.prl?PidBox=TU0203

 

The marker that I reported: http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMFRY5_US_Geological_Survey_460_Puunene_Maui_Hawaii_DESTROYED

[+LSUFan]

I've been trying to access this particular datasheet to see if NGS has updated it with my recovery, but it seems to just stop and give out garbled lines. Is anyone able to get the thing to load fully?

 

http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/ds_mark.prl?PidBox=TU0203

 

The marker that I reported: http://www.Waymarking.com/waymarks/WMFRY5_US_Geological_Survey_460_Puunene_Maui_Hawaii_DESTROYED

 

The mark has been reported destroyed (by you and this was accepted by the NGS) so the datasheet shows as much, which is why you are probably getting a datasheet link that doesn't show anything on it. You can scroll to the bottom of what you are getting and see that the mark has two X's, for horizontal and vertical, which means it was destroyed.....as you can read in the non-published reasons/codes above.

 

When a mark is reported destroyed, the main datasheet, for a lack of better terms, goes into a different database (non-published)......... vs the (published) datasheet database that you are used to seeing.

 

It's basically just a filing system that keeps destroyed marks out of the file that shows active marks. When you search the published/active marks database now for TU0203, what you are getting in essence is a placeholder comment that tells you that there used to be a datasheet here, but it was moved (or removed) after being reported destroyed.

 

You can still access some destroyed marks datasheet by going to the NGS datasheets site:

 

http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/ds_pid.prl

 

1.Enter your PID in the box, then make sure to check the "include destroyed marks" option.

2. Click the submit button

3. Highlight the PID and info line in the box

4. Select get datasheets

 

You should now get the datasheet which you are trying to find, which shows the following:

 

TU0203 STATION RECOVERY (2012)

TU0203

TU0203'RECOVERY NOTE BY GEOCACHING 2012 (KAK)

TU0203''USBM' PAINT MARKING NOT FOUND. 'BM' ETCHED INTO CEMENT FOUND ON

TU0203'ABUTMENT. HOLE IN CEMENT NEXT TO 'BM' AND IS ASSUMED TO BE FORMER

TU0203'LOCATION OF THE DISK.

TU0203

TU0203 STATION RECOVERY (2012)

TU0203

TU0203'RECOVERY NOTE BY GEOCACHING 2012

TU0203'DISK HAS BEEN REMOVED.

 

P.S. There has been some debate several times in these forums whether or not geocachers/amateurs should be reporting marks as destroyed (vs did not find) to the NGS. One of the points being, that once a mark has been accepted as destroyed by the NGS, then it takes the datasheet out of the published database. What if the amateur was wrong and the mark is still there? Now the datasheet is unpublished for future use.

 

Personally, I do report marks that are 'definitely' destroyed as such.....but make sure without a doubt. You need to be very certain when submtting destroyed reports to the NGS. If there is any doubt, then report it as "did not find".

 

A good example is a road that has been paved over, that may have buried the mark underneath the asphalt/concrete. Technically, the mark is not destroyed, just very inaccessable.....and should be reported as a 'did not find'. You just need to state the mark may have been covered over in your report.

 

If there is some uncertainty (like you don't have the disk in hand or know for a fact that a bridge, building, or other setting has been demolished), you can always submit a "did not find" report, but say it's presumed destroyed. This way the datasheet stays in the published database, but future users will know that it probably isn't there by reading your recovery report, and won't expend the energies to find it.

Edited January 24, 2013 by LSUFan

[kayakbird]

cesariojpn,

 

What was your HH2 Lat/Long? Would be nice to see where it pegs on Google Earth - the current L/L looks to be nearly 200 ft off.

 

The 1968 RECOVERY must be in error: '>>>14 FEET NORTHEAST OF CENTER LINE OF HIGHWAY, >>>>> THE LETTERS USBM ARE PAINTED ON THE ABUTMENT BY THE MARK.'. Your photos show that the mark is much more than 14 feet from the paved road centerline and I think that the 1968 crew would have noted the chiseled B M.

 

How deep is that gouged out hole? Did you see any remnants of the disk stem or the cementing material? If those, or a disk impression, are present it can be argued that a 'Poor, disturbed, mutilated, requires maintenance' RECOVERY is appropriate. A local irrigation project engineer may be quite happy to have a starting point accurate to tenth of a foot.

 

A well written Note in your GeoLog would be much more helpfull than the DESTROYED symbol.

 

kayakbird

[cesariojpn]

cesariojpn,

 

What was your HH2 Lat/Long? Would be nice to see where it pegs on Google Earth - the current L/L looks to be nearly 200 ft off.

 

The 1968 RECOVERY must be in error: '>>>14 FEET NORTHEAST OF CENTER LINE OF HIGHWAY, >>>>> THE LETTERS USBM ARE PAINTED ON THE ABUTMENT BY THE MARK.'. Your photos show that the mark is much more than 14 feet from the paved road centerline and I think that the 1968 crew would have noted the chiseled B M.

 

Rolling onto midnight here, so this might sound incoherent.

 

I need to figure out which SD card has the additional photos that I took, but here is the site in question on Google Street View: http://goo.gl/maps/jaGi2

 

Honestly, the Geocache l/l info (N 20° 50.133 W 156° 24.100 (NAD 83) Altitude: 460.16) puts the location around here. The raw datasheet values puts the location to the right of the Geocache location in that ditch paralleling the road. But the ditch is dirt lined, not cemented. I did not find any evidence that it was cement lined significantly in both south and northerly directions. And if you look abit, the next nearest ditches cut by the road described is this one north of the Pulehu Dump (which is the Haiku Ditch) and this one more south of the truck crossing road and the location I found (not a named ditch, appears to be a "tributary" ditch to funnel excess water from Kauhikoa Ditch near the Pulehu/Omaopio intersect to Lowrie Ditch). The truck crossing does cut a ditch but doesn't match several descriptions on the notes.

 

I did make sure that I read the datasheet notes as best I could, and the location I found does match the descriptions quite similarly. There is a crossroad (of sorts, but farther than the ditches in the area unless you accept the dirt roads that has the gates), it's on the ditch named (after double checking topo maps and tracing the route), it's on an abutment, at right angles, on the road described and within the mileage indicated and compass directions. I think the geo info might be off.

 

Whats really bugging me is this:

 

TU0203 STATION RECOVERY (2012)

TU0203

TU0203'RECOVERY NOTE BY GEOCACHING 2012

TU0203'DISK HAS BEEN REMOVED.

 

Is NGS really trolling Geocache for info now? Cause if they are, I'd need to double check a variety of marks in the database that other people have marked as destroyed in my area.

Edited January 26, 2013 by cesariojpn

[foxtrot_xray]

Whats really bugging me is this:

 

TU0203 STATION RECOVERY (2012)

TU0203

TU0203'RECOVERY NOTE BY GEOCACHING 2012

TU0203'DISK HAS BEEN REMOVED.

 

Is NGS really trolling Geocache for info now? Cause if they are, I'd need to double check a variety of marks in the database that other people have marked as destroyed in my area.

No. If the NGS added a recovery, then it would say that the recovery was from the NGS, not Geocaching.

[+LSUFan]

As stated, what is on-site looks to be more than 14 feet (but this could be an error or typo) from the centerline. It also appears they may be new concrete, as the colors don't seem to match, at the near end of the canal.

 

You could just go across the road and locate TU0202, which was found as late as 1997. Once located, You could then stretch a tape to measure the 95.3 feet that separates the two benchmarks...and see where this puts you on the canal wall.

 

Even if you cannot locate TU0202, you should be able to measure out where it should have been from it's description...then still run a tape to measure off the 95.3 feet to be accurate.

 

Just doing quick math, TU0202 is 81.6 feet southwest of centerline of Pulehu Road according to it's datasheet. Subtracting this measurement from the total distance of 95.3 feet between the two benchmarks, gives a difference of 13.7 feet (real close to 14) for northeast of same centerline of road where TU0203 should be located.

 

From reading the 1993 NOS recovery report on TU0202, where they checked the elevations of TU0202 and TU0203.....it makes me wonder if they weren't the ones who actually inscribed what you are seeing on the concrete wall.

 

Here is the TU0202 recovery I am referring to:

 

08/13/1993 by NOS (GOOD)

RECOVERY NOTE BY NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE 1993 (JGF) THE STATION IS 4 MI (6.4 KM) SE OF THE TOWN OF PUUNENE ON THE ISLAND OF MAUI, HAWAII. TO REACH FROM THE POST OFFICE IN THE TOWN OF PUUNENE, PROCEED E ON HANSEN RD FOR 1 MI (1.6 KM) TO PULEHU RD ON RIGHT. TURN RIGHT AND PROCEED 3.6 MI (5.8 KM) TO GRADED CROSSROAD AT LOWRIE DITCH, ON RIGHT SIDE OF HIGHWAY IN W ANGLE OF CROSSROAD ON NW BANK OF CANAL. THE STATION IS 81.6 FT (24.9 M) SW OF CENTERLINE OF HIGHWAY, 68.8 FT (21.0 M) SW OF CENTER OF SW RAIL OF HIGHWAY BRIDGE, 5 FT (1.5 M) NW OF EDGE OF CONCRETE CANAL BANK, 11 FT (3.4 M) SW OF CENTER OF CANAL ROAD, 95.3 FT (29.0 M) SW OF BENCH MARK 460(USGS). THE MONUMENT APPEARS TO LEAN SLIGHTLY AWAY FROM THE CANAL, BUT A CHECK IN DIFFERENCE OF ELEVATION BETWEEN BM 460(USGS) INDICATES THAT THE MARK IS AT ITS ORIGIONAL ELEVATION.

 

P.S. Looking at Google Earth, it appears you would have to cross a NO TRESPASSING line to look for TU0202. Just letting you know.

Edited January 26, 2013 by LSUFan

[+billwallace]

The description says that it is on the southwest end of the abutment and that it is 14' from the road centerline. The "BM" in your pic looks like it is on the northeast end of that abutment and more than 14 feet from the road centerline.

[kayakbird]

Whats really bugging me is this:

 

TU0203 STATION RECOVERY (2012)

TU0203

TU0203'RECOVERY NOTE BY GEOCACHING 2012

TU0203'DISK HAS BEEN REMOVED.

 

Is NGS really trolling Geocache for info now? Cause if they are, I'd need to double check a variety of marks in the database that other people have marked as destroyed in my area.

No. If the NGS added a recovery, then it would say that the recovery was from the NGS, not Geocaching.

 

Well, I wasn't going to say anything, but here is a nice chiseled square with corner wings

 

PARK CO, MONTANA

 

 

that was in the books with five decimal point accuracy for over sixty years.

 

DATASHEET from GeoCache 'snapshot'.

 

QX0667* NAD 83(1992)- 45 39 06.58512(N) 110 26 54.56644(W) ADJUSTED

QX0667* NAVD 88 - 1568.04 (+/-2cm) 5144.5 (feet) VERTCON

QX0667

 

lines deleted

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

 

QX0667 HISTORY - Date Condition Recov. By

QX0667 HISTORY - UNK MONUMENTED

QX0667 HISTORY - 1951 GOOD USGS

QX0667

QX0667 STATION DESCRIPTION

QX0667

QX0667''DESCRIBED BY US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1951

QX0667''BEAVER CREEK SCHOOL, 2.5 MI. W. OF, 74 FT. S. AND 1 FT. LOWER THAN

QX0667''RD., AT TOP OF E. END OF STEEP DUGWAY IN RD., ON TOP OF ROCK, IN

QX0667''PLACE, CHISELED SQUARE, SANDSTONE SLAB PAINTED ---5140.6---.

QX0667''

QX0667''TO REACH STATION FROM LIVINGSTON POST OFFICE, GO 6.1 MI. S. ON MAIN

QX0667''STREET, THENCE E. ON MAIN TRAVELED RD., TO TOP OF HILL AND RD. FORK.

QX0667''

QX0667''RECOVERED AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS

QX0667''

QX0667''STATION IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 6 MI. SE. ALONG THE NEW BOULDER

QX0667''ROAD FROM LIVINGSTON, MONTANA, IN THE NE. CORNER OF SEC. 23, T 2 S,

QX0667''R 10 E, 114 FT. S. OF THE JUNCTION OF THE NEW BOULDER ROAD WITH THE

QX0667''OLD BOULDER ROAD.

QX0667''

QX0667''STATION MARK--CHISELED SQUARE, ON TOP OF ROCK, IN PLACE.

 

*****Note added 1240 26JAN2012 - The DATASHEET was still there when I did the GOOD NGS RECOVERY on 20AUG2012.

 

This comes up with 'Include Destroyed Marks.' checked:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pid Name Lat Lon Elev O o Hv

------ ----------------------------- ---------- ----------- --------- - - --

>QX0667 TBM 5140 45 39 06.5/110 26 54.5 1567. 3 3 TT

>QX0667 TBM 5140 45 39 06.5/110 26 54.5 1567. 3 3 NN

 

ALSO EVAPORATED FROM PARK CO

 

kayakbird

 

PS: Shouldn't mention this, but DSWorld will still pin both of these in Park County, Montana.

 

Edited January 27, 2013 by kayakbird

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

OK everyone. Here is the classic example of the "Why" to NOT report "Destroyed" on any benchmark or bench mark unless you have the disk in hand or undeniable proof that it is indeed gone (as in a building imploded or a mountain top blown away by a volcanic blast). And the reason to go look to see if the mark is really gone if you see a mark declared as destroyed on GC.

 

!!Do NOT submit any "Destroyed" reports to the NGS unless you do have that disk in hand or undeniable proof that it is indeed gone, because it WILL disappear from the their easily seen data base!!

 

CLASSIC EXAMPLE!

Early on in our hunting - 2003 - we thought a mark PID GP0270, H 405 had been destroyed due to bulldozing in the area that we thought the mark should be.

Then one day, about a month later as we were driving past the area, I spotted a witness post - on the other side of the highway than where we had looked previously. I pointed to it and yelled "Witness post"! John tromped on the brakes and turned the truck around and we went onto a side road to look at the witness post. He got out his compass and finally found the mark buried in the sand. It was what we have now found out - things today can appear very differently than when the data sheet was written. It doesn't necessarily make the data sheet wrong, it is just how things have changed so much over the years.

 

That is extreme fun of researching these old marks.

 

So, have fun, just make notes instead of calling something destroyed, to save face.

 

Shirley~

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[kayakbird]

OK everyone. Here is the classic example of the "Why" to NOT report "Destroyed" >>>>>>>

 

<<<<<<<That is extreme fun of researching these old marks.

 

So, have fun, just make notes instead of calling something destroyed, to save face.

 

Shirley~

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Shirley,

 

Thanks for the story - it would be so easy for everyone to apply the NGS DESTROYED criteria to their GeoCache logs.

 

Looks like someone at NGS did correct the L/L to what you logged in your Found GeoLog. DSWorld pins it correctly.

 

MEL

Edited January 27, 2013 by kayakbird

[kayakbird]

 

Still wondering if your HH2 is anywhere close to the above area? MEL

Edited January 27, 2013 by kayakbird

[+EdrickV]

Whats really bugging me is this:

 

TU0203 STATION RECOVERY (2012)

TU0203

TU0203'RECOVERY NOTE BY GEOCACHING 2012

TU0203'DISK HAS BEEN REMOVED.

 

Is NGS really trolling Geocache for info now? Cause if they are, I'd need to double check a variety of marks in the database that other people have marked as destroyed in my area.

No. If the NGS added a recovery, then it would say that the recovery was from the NGS, not Geocaching.

 

Well, I wasn't going to say anything, but here is a nice chiseled square with corner wings

 

PARK CO, MONTANA

 

 

that was in the books with five decimal point accuracy for over sixty years.

 

DATASHEET from GeoCache 'snapshot'.

 

QX0667* NAD 83(1992)- 45 39 06.58512(N) 110 26 54.56644(W) ADJUSTED

QX0667* NAVD 88 - 1568.04 (+/-2cm) 5144.5 (feet) VERTCON

QX0667

 

lines deleted

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

 

QX0667 HISTORY - Date Condition Recov. By

QX0667 HISTORY - UNK MONUMENTED

QX0667 HISTORY - 1951 GOOD USGS

QX0667

QX0667 STATION DESCRIPTION

QX0667

QX0667''DESCRIBED BY US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1951

QX0667''BEAVER CREEK SCHOOL, 2.5 MI. W. OF, 74 FT. S. AND 1 FT. LOWER THAN

QX0667''RD., AT TOP OF E. END OF STEEP DUGWAY IN RD., ON TOP OF ROCK, IN

QX0667''PLACE, CHISELED SQUARE, SANDSTONE SLAB PAINTED ---5140.6---.

QX0667''

QX0667''TO REACH STATION FROM LIVINGSTON POST OFFICE, GO 6.1 MI. S. ON MAIN

QX0667''STREET, THENCE E. ON MAIN TRAVELED RD., TO TOP OF HILL AND RD. FORK.

QX0667''

QX0667''RECOVERED AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS

QX0667''

QX0667''STATION IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 6 MI. SE. ALONG THE NEW BOULDER

QX0667''ROAD FROM LIVINGSTON, MONTANA, IN THE NE. CORNER OF SEC. 23, T 2 S,

QX0667''R 10 E, 114 FT. S. OF THE JUNCTION OF THE NEW BOULDER ROAD WITH THE

QX0667''OLD BOULDER ROAD.

QX0667''

QX0667''STATION MARK--CHISELED SQUARE, ON TOP OF ROCK, IN PLACE.

 

*****Note added 1240 26JAN2012 - The DATASHEET was still there when I did the GOOD NGS RECOVERY on 20AUG2012.

 

This comes up with 'Include Destroyed Marks.' checked:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pid Name Lat Lon Elev O o Hv

------ ----------------------------- ---------- ----------- --------- - - --

>QX0667 TBM 5140 45 39 06.5/110 26 54.5 1567. 3 3 TT

>QX0667 TBM 5140 45 39 06.5/110 26 54.5 1567. 3 3 NN

 

ALSO EVAPORATED FROM PARK CO

 

kayakbird

 

PS: Shouldn't mention this, but DSWorld will still pin both of these in Park County, Montana.

 

 

QX0667 has TBM in the name as well as the TT code, which seems to indicate that it was intended to be a Temporary BenchMark, which is probably why it was removed from the database. DSWorld can still pull up it's info, as well as that of other TBM marks, like these marks: AS9998, AT6580, and NE0472, all in the same county and all designated TBM 1. There was no destroyed recovery on either QX0667 or QX0674, and DSWorld's info does include the fact that it was recovered in good condition by a Geocacher. TBM marks show up on a county search if you check "Browse Mode" when doing the search. (And Park County has a lot of them, all nonpub but not flagged as destroyed.)

[cesariojpn]

OK everyone. Here is the classic example of the "Why" to NOT report "Destroyed" on any benchmark or bench mark unless you have the disk in hand or undeniable proof that it is indeed gone (as in a building imploded or a mountain top blown away by a volcanic blast). And the reason to go look to see if the mark is really gone if you see a mark declared as destroyed on GC.

 

Please don't tell me I return to be accused of maleficence? I will not tolerate being made of as an example for the follies of others.

[+LSUFan]

OK everyone. Here is the classic example of the "Why" to NOT report "Destroyed" on any benchmark or bench mark unless you have the disk in hand or undeniable proof that it is indeed gone (as in a building imploded or a mountain top blown away by a volcanic blast). And the reason to go look to see if the mark is really gone if you see a mark declared as destroyed on GC.

 

Please don't tell me I return to be accused of maleficence? I will not tolerate being made of as an example for the follies of others.

 

OK everyone. Here is the classic example of the "Why" to NOT report "Destroyed" on any benchmark or bench mark unless you have the disk in hand or undeniable proof that it is indeed gone (as in a building imploded or a mountain top blown away by a volcanic blast). And the reason to go look to see if the mark is really gone if you see a mark declared as destroyed on GC.

 

!!Do NOT submit any "Destroyed" reports to the NGS unless you do have that disk in hand or undeniable proof that it is indeed gone, because it WILL disappear from the their easily seen data base!!

 

CLASSIC EXAMPLE!

Early on in our hunting - 2003 - we thought a mark PID GP0270, H 405 had been destroyed due to bulldozing in the area that we thought the mark should be.

Then one day, about a month later as we were driving past the area, I spotted a witness post - on the other side of the highway than where we had looked previously. I pointed to it and yelled "Witness post"! John tromped on the brakes and turned the truck around and we went onto a side road to look at the witness post. He got out his compass and finally found the mark buried in the sand. It was what we have now found out - things today can appear very differently than when the data sheet was written. It doesn't necessarily make the data sheet wrong, it is just how things have changed so much over the years.

 

That is extreme fun of researching these old marks.

 

So, have fun, just make notes instead of calling something destroyed, to save face.

 

Shirley~

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

I don't see where you were supposedly made an example for the follies of others. I did see where you didn't quote enough of 2oldfarts's initial post to see where they were talking about the "classic example" being something they had done, which was followed by the title of "classic example" and their tale. I emboldened it so it will stand out above.

[kayakbird]

cesariojpn,

 

I think what we are all trying to do here is have an educational session based on years of experience.

 

Yes, the NGS will look at a combination of GeoCache logs and official NGS RECOVERIES and move a mark into the DESTROYED files. Sometimes the DATASHEET can be retrieved, other times all that comes up is the non-published format.

 

Yes, activity takes place which is not documented and sets up a Bench-marker for mistakes. If things are not found as expected, it is a good idea to take measurements of all the calls, check for reciprocal bearings, left/right and up/down swaps, and so on. I think that your canal bridge was re-built and the mark will not be found, but maybe the distance from centerline should have a 24 ft call.

 

Sometimes expected/documented activity does not take place. This old bridge abutment was not disturbed as anticipated by USGS in 1963 UINTAH CO, UTAH, but it does have non-documented stamping from 1964.

 

When requesting information on this forum, please remember that there are no secrets among Bench-markers. Include latitude/longitude, Google Earth screen shots of the area, even estimates of bearing/distance; and anything else that will help us make suggestions.

 

kayakbird