Adding a new Benchmark to Geocaching Website

[brantport14]

If there is a new benchmark, is that updated accordingly to the Geocaching website? 

Forexample:
 

[+Michaelcycle]

No, unfortunately. There was a single data dump in the early 2000's (I'm sure one of the helpful posters here will be more specific) and it has never been updated.

[brantport14]

Time for someone at Groundspeak to do some updating, it seems!

[Z15]

Not on their priority list for sure...

[Where's George]

Add it to Waymarking  under the Benchmarks category, as one way to document its existence . . .

[kayakbird]

Hey,

Is the NGS back to using what we were calling the 'Goldie, Oldies' metal?  A thread on that subject here somewhere.  I would suggest that all 'Newbies' go after the ones that are 'OTM' (older than me) rather than keep doing the Sinatra '-silly old ram-------dam....' thing about the 2000 dump.

Traveled north to south a couple weeks ago and again wished that if  I still had downhill knees and and Kings field notes.  Still willing to share my Google Earth .kmz file for his occpied high points.

kayakbird   - presently in Moab, Utah

 

 

[+Harry Dolphin]

10 hours ago, Where's George said:

Add it to Waymarking  under the Benchmarks category, as one way to document its existence . . .

Yes.  I did that once.  As part of the Center of Population series of benchmarks.  I did that in 2008.  It was found once in 2009.  Wow! What great fun!

[+Manville Possum]

I have about 20 BM's like that listed on the Waymarking site. It's a good place to share photos and coordinates. 

[+The Snowdog]

Well that answered my question. I have found that the data on the geocaching site is often out of date (that is, not reflecting recent reports on the condition of the mark). Is this data never updated? 

[+8Nuts MotherGoose]

1 hour ago, The Snowdog said:

Well that answered my question. I have found that the data on the geocaching site is often out of date (that is, not reflecting recent reports on the condition of the mark). Is this data never updated? 

Yep. Never updated. Back in the early days of Geocaching, you could find all the local caches rather quickly and have nothing else to do but wait for another local cache to be placed in a month or two. Groundspeak did a one-time dump of all the NGS Benchmarks and posted them to give us something to do with our GPS unit. Today, with so many caches to find, there are few who go after Benchmarks because they do not add to your cache count.

[Bill93]

You can always go look at the NGS data base for current information.  Find the link for Benchmarks, choose your search method, and pick text, not shapefiles.

https://www.ngs.noaa.gov

I quickly tired of finding (or not) green match holders in conifer trees, and decided that while geocaching occasionally took me to interesting places I wouldn't have noticed, it wasn't otherwise a useful activity. 

Bench mark hunting (once I got a feel for what the professionals were interested in and how they described positions) lets me make a useful contribution by posting recoveries both here and to NGS, is still treasure hunting outdoors, sometimes involves historical research, and teaches me about geodetic science.  I also like playing with some technical toys I acquired for that, including metal detector, magnetic locator, obsolescent theodolite, and now a rather old professional GPS receiver to submit files for GPS on Benchmarks that I've posted about.

[+cerberus1]

14 hours ago, 8Nuts MotherGoose said:

Yep. Never updated. Back in the early days of Geocaching, you could find all the local caches rather quickly and have nothing else to do but wait for another local cache to be placed in a month or two. Groundspeak did a one-time dump of all the NGS Benchmarks and posted them to give us something to do with our GPS unit. Today, with so many caches to find, there are few who go after Benchmarks because they do not add to your cache count.

That's the way I understood it as well (benchmarks simply as a fill-in), and agree for the reason why it's not a priority today.

There's a couple other sites that would like some updating, but with lack of a "find count", they probably won't see much either. 

[+shorbird]

Bill93,

Thank you for your input on this. Geocaching can be fun, but benchmark hunting is much more rewarding. I, too, decided to look for benchmarks instead of caches for the same reasons that you gave. More people should travel that way.

 

[kayakbird]

Hi All,

Bill touched on 'historical' and a good discussion along those lines is something we have not had here for awhile and I miss them.

I am just about back to Montana after a six week swing (some birding, but mostly kayaking) through a fairly large area where I have bench marked.  Re-did exactly one that I had blundered and NGS recovered as 'Not Found' several years ago.  If you will indulge me I will touch on some of the 'historical' memories that filtered by along with 3000 miles or so:

1]   Fur trapping rendezvous & Ashley's further-est down steam travel on the Green River.

2]  Oregon Trail over the pass discovered by the above gentleman.

3]  Gazed at high points and river valleys that became scientifically known as a result of the four great western surveys in the 1860's & 70's - the result of one being instrumental in the formation of Yellowstone National Park.  And, Yes, I still think that somewhere there is permanent evidence of occupation by 'Kings 40th'!

4]  Had a couple of crossings on a multi-state, multi-year level line that was found to have a sizable blunder when finished.  Started  with chiseled squares in the top of native stone posts and ended with 'modern' brass caps in concrete settings. See Special Publication #18 for the description and location of many of these bench marks.

5]  Was again amazed at the density of vertical control points (1 or more per mile) in portions of central west Mohave County, Arizona; and the enduring quality of the concrete in a couple of no longer used structures associated with those level lines.

6]  Did not travel in either Meagher County, Montana or Albany County, Wyoming, but again wondered why those two areas have several of the short lived depression area "& State Survey" marks.

Great Memories.  Maybe next trip I'll be able to take another run at a couple of most likely to prove the belief in 3].  kayakbird

 

 

 

 

 

[gpsblake]

On 11/19/2017 at 2:45 PM, cerberus1 said:

That's the way I understood it as well (benchmarks simply as a fill-in), and agree for the reason why it's not a priority today.

Along with Waymarking, whereigos, etc. etc... In fact, when's the last time Groundspeak came out WITH ANYTHING? I'm sorry, all they do is maintain the database without a single fresh idea in nearly a decade. No new cache types, no new GPS games, just nothing but sitting back. And they wonder why geocaching as a whole has declined so much in the past 5 years. Look how long it took them to put out an app and it doesn't support a lot of things. It really wouldn't take a bunch of resources to update the benchmarks on the database. 

[Bill93]

Benchmark hunting never was or will be as popular (sell as much) as caching.  As long as they don't cut back on its support I don't care much.

If caching is declining (I hadn't paid attention), I'd guess

1) most people who might be interested have tried it so entry is now mostly as kids get to an age to do it.

2) it isn't new so it isn't as cool (whatever the fashionable term is now) a thing to do as it was. Pokemon took a lot of people when it was new and hot, for instance.

3) many who tried it for a while have tired of it.

4) there isn't as much challenge and therefore feeling of accomplishment when there is a cache every 0.1 mile in all directions.

 

 

Edited January 31, 2018 by Bill93
Stupid smileys not intended