Canadian Bench Marks

[+Rogue_monkey]

i know this has been talked about but i would like to bring it up here.

would it be possible to bring canadian benchmarks to the gc website so we can search and log them like our friends south of the boarder.

[+res2100]

Since there is an obvious demand for benchmarks not just in Canada, but also worldwide and also for those ones in the USA by other agencies which aren't listed, the simplest and quickest sollution would be to just allow users themselves to enter a benchmark into the system as they find them...similar to the way we create a new geocache. Ok so the only problem I see is that maybe duplicates would be entered, but don't most of them have some sort of unique indentifier and organization who placed it? I am sure something could be worked out.

 

I know when I was in Arizona last summer, I found several benchmarks, but when I went to find them in the benchmark section, none of them were listed.

[thorin]

There are Canadian benchmarks in the system. You can see a bunch if you do a ".....all nearby benchmarks" on this cache:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...51-e37e527b570d

( GCJHPA )

 

Now I'm not claiming that this is in anyway a full list of them but they're definately there.

 

Edit: I would like to ask if a Benchmarks section (line) could be added to our stats page, under "List of all items found".

 

Thorin

Edited June 30, 2004 by thorin

[+GrizzlyJohn]

There are Canadian benchmarks in the system. You can see a bunch if you do a ".....all nearby benchmarks" on this cache:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...51-e37e527b570d

( GCJHPA )

 

Yea but I think those benchmarks are actually just US benchmarks because this cache is very near the US border.

[+Mopar]

Edit: I would like to ask if a Benchmarks section (line) could be added to our stats page, under "List of all items found".

 

Thorin

There already is.

 

[thorin]

DOH I had looked at a number other profiles and never seen a line for it.

 

/me hangs his head in shame

There are Canadian benchmarks in the system. You can see a bunch if you do a ".....all nearby benchmarks" on this cache:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...51-e37e527b570d

( GCJHPA )

 

Yea but I think those benchmarks are actually just US benchmarks because this cache is very near the US border.

DOH guess it was too good to be true.

 

Thorin

Edited June 30, 2004 by thorin

[thorin]

So what's the scoop are Canadian (and other) Benchmarks going to be added?

 

Thorin

[+Mopar]

Is there a freely accessible listing of them that could be legally integrated into the website? I think that would be the major hurdle.

[+res2100]

Looks like there are a few benchmarks located on Canadian soil (although they say they are located in the states and are placed by US agencies), near the US borders.

Edited July 5, 2004 by res2100

[+Mopar]

I guess you have a catch 22 then. Seems to me that unless the answer is an absulute "NO", Jeremy can't really answer the question without seeing the DB being considered. You won't take the time to do a simple webseach to see if there is a DB of benchmarks he can possibly use.

Stalemate.

Instead of just saying "I want Canadian Benchmarks" and offering no way to add them, how about saying "Hey Jeremy, the Canadian govt has a free database of benchmarks here. Can you add it to the site please?"

Edited July 5, 2004 by Mopar

[thorin]

Hey Jeremy, the Canadian govt has a database of benchmarks here (see below). Can you add it to the site please.

 

Perhaps this would help:

 

Public info:

http://www.meds-sdmm.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/meds/pr...c/default_e.asp

 

Examples:

http://www.meds-sdmm.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/meds/pr...gston®ion=CA

 

Possibly useful technical details:

http://www.meds-sdmm.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/meds/Pr...documents_e.htm

Edited July 5, 2004 by thorin

[+res2100]

See this cache:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=17841

(http://www.geod.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e/produc...bn_e/cbn_e.html)

 

and this cache:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=46317

 

and this cache too:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=32676

 

Lots of other international sites containing benchmarks too.

 

Now its just a matter of perhaps TPTB contacting these organizations to get a database of the benchmarks...They obviously were able to get the information for certain American benchmarks, so logically you would think they can get it for other countries too (not just Canada in this case either). It's probably best that someone representing geocaching.com contact them, as opposed to just one of us users, but we could certainly help in any way that would be needed. I do recall that Jeremy last year said that he would implement other benchmarks if he could get a list, so that is some promising news.

 

Or as I mentioned before, create a section that allows us users to enter benchmarks into the system manually as we find them...but that would probably need to be discussed in some detail first to see how that would work.

Edited July 5, 2004 by res2100

[+PDOP's]

Or as I mentioned before, create a section that allows us users to enter benchmarks into the system manually as we find them...but that would probably need to be discussed in some detail first to see how that would work.

I agree that this is probably the best way to go for now. Issues with the Crown copyright are always going to be a problem with regards to getting access to a complete listing of survey monuments in Canada.

 

Another cache along this theme is the Brass Cap caches in Alberta.

[thorin]

So gc.com guys what's the next step?

 

Along with the information above I've also found:

 

Passive Networks : The National Horizontal and Vertical Primary Reference Networks >

http://www.geod.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e/produc...d_e/trad_e.html

(Which contains references on 100,000 survey markers).

 

A full list of Canadian passive [survey] networks can also be found here > http://www.geod.nrcan.gc.ca/index_e/produc.../passive_e.html

 

Thorin

Edited July 7, 2004 by thorin

[Elias]

Many, many moons ago (sometime last year), I was in talks with the folks who maintain the Canadian Benchmark database asking for permission to add their marks to our database. They granted permission and were supposed to give me an ftp area where I could download the data rather than scrape it from their site. It was a low priority request for them, so I pinged them every now and then and they always responded that they'd get to it. I can't remember where it left off, but I suspect that at some point I forgot to ping them again and they forgot to put the data up for me. I'll look through my old email and see if I can find those contacts and see if I can pick this up again.

 

Elias

[thorin]

Thanks very much!

 

And of course be sure to let us know if there's anything we can do to help.

Edited July 7, 2004 by thorin

[+hedberg]

There is a discussion right now in Sweden about Swedish benchmark, if we provide the data could it perhaps be added? Sweden are the 6th biggest geocaching country in the world.

[thorin]

Any update on this?

[+Captain Morgan]

But don't forget trigpoints which are quite similar to benchmarks. If we can provide trigpoints/benchmarks from each country (as I believe there is such in almost every country), how difficult it is to add them to geocaching.com?

[thorin]

Cpt. Morgan is there a online source for the trig points you mentioned?

 

Jeremy/Elias any update on integrating a CDN Benchmark Database?

 

Thorin

[thorin]

Bump.....we wanna help tell us what we can do.

[Jeremy]

The same solution for locationless caches will be used to allow benchmarks from other countries. We're actively working on that solution now.

[thorin]

Sweet thanks for the update and sorry for being pushy. I just know you guys are swamped and also know this is something alot of people are interested in.

 

Thorin

[+murfster]

The same solution for locationless caches will be used to allow benchmarks from other countries. We're actively working on that solution now.

Any new word on this project??

 

Murfster

[+paradox63]

The same solution for locationless caches will be used to allow benchmarks from other countries. We're actively working on that solution now.

Any new word on this project??

 

Murfster

 

Is there any progress on this?

The province of New Brunswick, Canada has the "NB Survey Control Network" which lists the survey monuments in the province at

https://www.web11.snb.ca/snb8000/product.as...roductID=NBCNT1

 

These should be able to be incorporated into the Geocaching.com site.

 

Any ideas/plans?

[+tozainamboku]

The same solution for locationless caches will be used to allow benchmarks from other countries. We're actively working on that solution now.

Any new word on this project??

 

Murfster

 

Canadian Benchmarks

[+Glenn]

Don't forget other Benchmarks being listed at Waymarking.com. Anyone can suggest additional catagories!

 

• UK Trigpoints

• Disneyland/DCA Benchmarks

• Vértices Geodésicos

• Portugal Geodetic Points

• Walt Disney World Benchmarks

• Recovered US Benchmarks

[+rutson]

So why are US benchmarks still on geocaching.com when they shoudl clearly now be on Waymarking.com?

[+Munkeh]

So why are US benchmarks still on geocaching.com when they shoudl clearly now be on Waymarking.com?

 

anyone want to answer this as I would be interested in hearing it

[+Glenn]

So why are US benchmarks still on geocaching.com when they shoudl clearly now be on Waymarking.com?

 

anyone want to answer this as I would be interested in hearing it

If I had to guess I would say the answer is grandfathering. The verb not the noun.

[+IV_Warrior]

So why are US benchmarks still on geocaching.com when they shoudl clearly now be on Waymarking.com?

 

anyone want to answer this as I would be interested in hearing it

If I had to guess I would say the answer is grandfathering. The verb not the noun.

 

Sounds reasonable to me. NEW virtuals/webcams/Earthcaches aren't allowed on gc.com, but existing ones are still around. Makes sense to keep the benchmark data that's already on the site there, at least as long as those others are still on the site.

[+JDandDD]

So why are US benchmarks still on geocaching.com when they shoudl clearly now be on Waymarking.com?

 

anyone want to answer this as I would be interested in hearing it

If I had to guess I would say the answer is grandfathering. The verb not the noun.

 

Sounds reasonable to me. NEW virtuals/webcams/Earthcaches aren't allowed on gc.com, but existing ones are still around. Makes sense to keep the benchmark data that's already on the site there, at least as long as those others are still on the site.

Not really sure that I agree that that's a good answer. All locationaless were moved to Waymarking and archived on geocaching. Existing locatioanless are not still around and not grandfathered so there is precident for getting rid of an entire category of caches.

 

I would think that benchmarks being more like a big locationaless category should be archived on geocaching and moved to Waymarking. Actually, there not even like locationaless in one sense, locationaless were counted in caches found and benchmarks never were. Even less reason for them to stay on geocaching.com.

 

Recovered US benchmarks are already on Waymarking.com and so should all benchmarks. If all other countries benchmarks have to be there so should US ones in all fairness. There is a Canadian Benchmark category on Waymarking.com as well so why would US benchmarks not be a Waymarking category.

 

Again, don't think I really agree that grandfathering is a good answer in this case.

 

JDandDD

Edited June 26, 2006 by JDandDD

[+budd-rdc]

I think grandfathering is "an" answer for this case.

 

Many people have recovered benchmarks using the Geocaching.com's BM database. It has a benefit of integration with caching, even if loosely, with stats in the same profile, and "nearest" search a click away. Although downloading GPX is not possible, LOC is, making it easier to combine the two activities.

 

Many people have requested to keep the U.S. benchmarks within Geocaching.com, and I think TPTB honored that request. Makes sense, since there were no bickerings/whingings/angst like they had with locationless and virtuals. Why change something when it isn't really broken?

 

I casually participate in the U.S. Recovered Benchmarks section in Waymarking, so I'm rooting for it to succeed. However, if we are to request TPTB to migrate their entire U.S. Benchmark database over there, I'd request certain core features be implemented first, to improve the game:

 

- Mechanism to update the database periodically from the USGS.

- Ability to generate GPX for each PID.

- Ability to integrate cacher/waymarker recovery as logs on the listing, and in GPX.

- Pocket Query for Benchmark GPXs.

 

I prefer the current benchmarking database to stay within Geocaching. I'm even willing to wait quietly for the features I requested, since I know they have many projects on their plate right now.

[+welch]

Sounds reasonable to me. NEW virtuals/webcams/Earthcaches aren't allowed on gc.com, but existing ones are still around. Makes sense to keep the benchmark data that's already on the site there, at least as long as those others are still on the site.

Not really sure that I agree that that's a good answer. All locationaless were moved to Waymarking and archived on geocaching. Existing locatioanless are not still around and not grandfathered so there is precident for getting rid of an entire category of caches.

 

I would think that benchmarks being more like a big locationaless category should be archived on geocaching and moved to Waymarking. Actually, there not even like locationaless in one sense, locationaless were counted in caches found and benchmarks never were. Even less reason for them to stay on geocaching.com.

...

ok so if it happens the same way we're going to have a 2-3 year wait, and then they'll be archived here?

[+tozainamboku]

So why are US benchmarks still on geocaching.com when they shoudl clearly now be on Waymarking.com?

 

anyone want to answer this as I would be interested in hearing it

 

Someone on the benchmarking forum may be able to verify this. Benchmarking (as it is found on Geocaching.com) is based on searching for benchmarks listed in the NGS database. As such it falls neither into Geocaching (therefore are not counted in your total geocaching find count) nor into Waymarking - where part of Waymarking is the population of a Waymarking category with the waymarks by participants. Benchmarking was added before Waymarking and has its own interface setup for searching for benchmarks and for reporting if found or not. A benchmark can also be reported as destroyed which a geocache or waymark cannot. (A geocache can be logged as Needs Maintenance - but this was added more recently). Benchmark descriptions are different than geocaches or waymarks - including that a bencmark will often have a list of related benchmarks called reference points. There has been some discussion about having Waymarking categories that could be pre-populated from a database. With a few changes, Waymarking could probably be tweeked to allow something like the benchmark database and include the other special features that currently exist for benchmark hunting. I would suspect that once Waymarking has gone through its beta checkout and is a bit more stable, Groundspeak may look at what it would take to move the NGS Benchmarks over to Waymarking so they will be with all of the other benchmark categories that have been created there. Until then, it will likely remain where it is.

[+JDandDD]

I think I'm missing something in this discussion. What makes NGS benchmarks any different than Canadian CSRS benchmarks other than the countries they are in? Nothing from what I can see. For that matter, almost every other country has benchmarks and databases of them. On the Canadian Benchmark category on Waymarking you can report missing, destroyed, found, condition and all those characteristics and I'm sure other countries will be set up similarly.

 

What makes these other countries' benchmarks different from NGS other than the countries they are in?

 

So, my first argument is simply if Canadian benchmarks (and those from other countries) have (and have is the right word) to be on Waymarking so why not NGS? If NGS are neither caches or waymarks then neither are other countries because they are exactly the same.

 

So, my other argument is, that all benchmarks from all countries should be treated in a consistent manner. Its no more complicated than that. If the standard, as it appears to be, is that they have to be on Waymarking then all including the NGS should be there.

 

JD

[Jeremy]

What makes these other countries' benchmarks different from NGS other than the countries they are in?

 

There isn't much of a difference data-wise, any more than for markers that aren't in the NGS database because they were placed by counties or states. The only difference is that they are listed on http://www.geocaching.com/mark while the other ones are not.

 

So, my first argument is simply if Canadian benchmarks (and those from other countries) have (and have is the right word) to be on Waymarking so why not NGS? If NGS are neither caches or waymarks then neither are other countries because they are exactly the same.

 

The functionality to do things like logging markers distroyed doesn't exist in Waymarking, as well as other features specific to the benchmarking concept. Once the features are available there would be no reason not to move them to Waymarking.com

 

So, my other argument is, that all benchmarks from all countries should be treated in a consistent manner. Its no more complicated than that. If the standard, as it appears to be, is that they have to be on Waymarking then all including the NGS should be there.

 

I agree. It should be consistent.

[andylphoto]

On the Canadian Benchmark category on Waymarking you can report missing, destroyed, found, condition and all those characteristics and I'm sure other countries will be set up similarly.

 

I don't see this. In looking at a couple different Canadian Benchmarks, I only see two logging options: "Visited" and "Write Note." Personally, I don't care where they are, whether it's Geocaching or Waymarking. I do like the logging options and the search options currently available on Geocaching. It doesn't appear to me that the Waymarking site is as refined yet in its search capabilities, and options for downloading coordinates. Maybe I just need to use it more.

[+JDandDD]

On the Canadian Benchmark category on Waymarking you can report missing, destroyed, found, condition and all those characteristics and I'm sure other countries will be set up similarly.

 

I don't see this. In looking at a couple different Canadian Benchmarks, I only see two logging options: "Visited" and "Write Note." Personally, I don't care where they are, whether it's Geocaching or Waymarking. I do like the logging options and the search options currently available on Geocaching. It doesn't appear to me that the Waymarking site is as refined yet in its search capabilities, and options for downloading coordinates. Maybe I just need to use it more.

Actually, when you post the waymark there is a drop down box from which you pick the standard condition statements, good, slightly damaged, damaged, missing etc.

JDandDD

[+budd-rdc]

On the Canadian Benchmark category on Waymarking you can report missing, destroyed, found, condition and all those characteristics and I'm sure other countries will be set up similarly.

 

I don't see this. In looking at a couple different Canadian Benchmarks, I only see two logging options: "Visited" and "Write Note." Personally, I don't care where they are, whether it's Geocaching or Waymarking. I do like the logging options and the search options currently available on Geocaching. It doesn't appear to me that the Waymarking site is as refined yet in its search capabilities, and options for downloading coordinates. Maybe I just need to use it more.

Actually, when you post the waymark there is a drop down box from which you pick the standard condition statements, good, slightly damaged, damaged, missing etc.

JDandDD

That only applies to the Waymark owner. No such feature is available to the subsequent visitors to the benchmark waymark.

 

The visitor can leave a comment, though, but it's still not the same as how benchmarking is done on GC.com.