Jump to content

How To Log A Mixed Report?


Recommended Posts

Sometimes reference marks, azimuth marks, etc. have their own listings in the NGS database, but other times, they're just described in the same record as the main station. How should I log a benchmark if I've found, say, the azimuth mark but not the main station?


I don't care about my "found" total. I just want to use the icon that will best inform other geocachers of the status of the benchmark. I don't think that "Found" would be appropriate, but I'm concerned that "Not Found" would discourage people who might glance through the listings and think this one isn't worth looking for. I'm inclined to use the "Note" feature in this case, but thought I'd get others' opinions on the topic first.



Link to comment

If I did not find the station mark I log it as a (NF). In my write up i will indicate it as such and add those ref. marks and az marks if any along with the coordinates etc. To me the station is the whole not the part. So all items in the NGS sheets are important. If you look at the datasheet recovery entries by the pros you most often will see where the status of the RMs and AMs is mentioned.

Link to comment

I'd say that if you didn't find a PID, it is just as unfound by you whether or not an AZ mark or REF marks exist for it, or whether you found them or not.


So, putting Not Found for a PID with no REF marks carries the same weight as a Not Found for a PID with REF marks.


The only point you could make for posting a note instead of not-found is if the reference box exists and has the azimuth and distance to the REF mark and for whatever reason you didn't use that information in your search. In that case, it may be an easy find for a person who uses the reference box information.


If the reference box information doesn't exist, or it does AND you used it, then you should just put Didn't Find It.

Link to comment
How should I log a benchmark if I've found, say, the azimuth mark but not the main station?

Personally, I'd go by what the PID itself is. If you found it or didn't find it report it that way. You can always clarify in your notes the details.


If you couldn't find it because it was in the middle of a busy street or otherwise inaccessible, then I think I'd be more tempted to file a note as I can't declare a find but it's not really a "not found" either.

Link to comment

Good question. IMHO, if the PID is the main mark and you look for the main mark and can't find it, then log as Not Found. If in the process you find and identify any ancillary marks (reference or azimuth), then this should be noted in your log.


If, on the other hand, you do not search for the main mark, then I would post a Note.


It seems to me that the Found and Not Found log entries should refer to the main mark only. To do otherwise would be confusing and may mislead browsers.


When a datasheet notes the presence of reference and/or azimuth marks, I try to remember to include their status in my logs. For example: "RM1 found as described. RM2 and azimuth marks not [seriously] searched for."


When a RM or AzMk for one PID is also assigned its own PID, I would consider it worthwhile to cross reference the two.



Just my two cents....



Edited by ArtMan
Link to comment

I ran across one of these recently. On the top of a local hill, there are a series of marks. From the descriptions, I believe there are about 5 marks and ref. points in all, but was only able to find 3. Here's the link JS3980.


Luckily, I was able to find two of the main marks, and one reference mark. I will search for the rest later.

Link to comment

wait, wait...


are we saying that anything that has its own PID get logged as a complete unit?


and what if you find the station and one REF but not the other?


what if they each have a PID?


what if the station and the AZ have PIDs?


i'm so conFUSED.

Link to comment

flask -


Example 1:

Station A has a PID

A's REF 1 has no PID

A's REF 2 has no PID

A's AZ mark has no PID


Example 2:

Station B has a PID

B's REF 1 has a PID

B's REF 2 has no PID

B's AZ mark has a PID


For example 1, you log station A only. If you find it, log Found It. If you didn't find it, log Couldn't find it, even if you found its REF marks and/or AZ mark.


For example 2, you log station B and B's REF 1 and B's AZ mark (3 possible logs).

You can't log B's REF 2 on its own since that disk has no PID. You can log B's REF 1 and B's AZ mark even if you don't find main station B.

Link to comment
For example 2, you log station B and B's REF 1 and B's AZ mark (3 possible logs).


I would write the log for the Station B exactly the same way I would for example Station A. That is, I'd mention if I did or did not find REF 1. That way anyone looking at the report for the main station would have all the information in summary form.


For the log for PID REF1 I would go into more detail about that find and it's condition. I probably wouldn't mention the other marks. If it did it would be only briefly or simply state "reference PID Station B for details".


All in all, I don't think there is only one right way of doing it. The precision is in the measurements, the logs are to be professional but they should get the job done.

Edited by GeckoGeek
Link to comment

what if you find the styation but not any of the refs? or you miss one? can you still log the station? we've been not logging them if we can't find the whole set. even if we know that finding one of the refs would mean an undue amount of damage to the surrounding plantlife, so we don't uncover it. we see the station, but we don't have the complete set.


have we been too conservative?

Link to comment

I think that this summarizes all the above:


If you look for a thing with a PID and you find it, you log FOUND, whether or not you looked for and found or didn't find any other thing or things that don't have PIDs but are associated with the thing with a PID.


If a mark has a PID and two RM, neither of which have a PID, you log FOUND if you find the mark. Even though the two RMs don't have their own PIDs, you should look for them and report your results in the comments section.


If a mark has a PID and two RMs, one of which has a PID, and you find all three, you get to log two FOUNDs, and you get to comment that you also found the RM that doesn't have a PID.


Recently, I have started providing handheld coords for no-PID RMs and AZs that I find, whether I find the mark or not.



Link to comment
what if you find the styation but not any of the refs? or you miss one? can you still log the station?

My understanding is that unless the reference marks have their own PIDs, their sole purpose is to help the user locate the main mark. That's why RMs normally have an arrow on them which points to the main mark. If I'm wrong, someone please educate me! Thanks.



Link to comment
what if you find the styation but not any of the refs? or you miss one? can you still log the station? we've been not logging them if we can't find the whole set.

The only time I would not log (on NGS) is if I intend to go back and search some more. Only when I am "done" with my search would I then submit a log.


On GC because I can edit my log, I would log as I go. (Ignoring normal procrastination habits. :o )

Link to comment

I agree completely in principle with the above conclusion.

HOWEVER: It is AWFUL hard to post a note on a GC.com benchmark page, where the person before me found only a reference mark, and logged it as a find (on GC.com). Have seen that twice now. The station mark appears to be gone in both cases. Emailed the first prior finder politely, pointing out the difference between an RM and a station mark. No answer. Posted a note with the correct info. [have to search my finds for that one - not sure which one it was...]


Just had the same thing happen again last week on DX4758. I just finished the "note" and emailed the prior "finder". I hope for better response on this one.

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.

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.

  • Create New...