Jump to content

Found Or Not?

Loch Cache

Recommended Posts

Quick question on finding a benchmark. In reference to MY5844. I was able to locate the square monument that is described in the document history. (A SQUARE CONCRETE MONUMENT 13 CM ON SIDE FLUSH WITH GROUND) I paced out the distance from two of the reference points. (14.30 METERS (46.9 FT) SOUTH FROM A HYDRANT, 6.46 METERS (21.2 FT) NORTH FROM A MANHOLE ON NEWBRIDGE AVENUE) The monument was right there and fits the description. The problem is there is no disk on top as described. (A STANDARD MAGS DISK STAMPED---414 P---, SET INTO THE TOP OF A SQUARE CONCRETE MONUMENT) Do I call this found, destroyed or not found? Your understanding advice would be welcomed.

Link to comment

There are two schools of thought on this. The first being that you didn't find the disk, therefore it's a no find. It a 'letter of the law' way of thinking. The second, a 'spirit of the law' way of thinking, being that since you found a portion of the mark - the monument - and the ties to the calls fit the description you could claim it as a find. You should note in your log that the disk is missing and/or the mark is damaged regardless of whether or not you log it as a find.

- Kewaneh

Link to comment

Loch Cache -


If it were me, I'd log MY5844 as Destroyed.


If the to-reach were more vague than it is, and the monumentation not so unusual, I would log this as a Didn't-find-it. However, what you found is pretty obviously the correct monumentation of the former disk, given the precise measurements of the "to-reach" description for the mark, and you found that the location of the right-sized cement square matches these distances.


I know that logging as Destroyed doesn't increase your Found count, but that's the breaks (so to speak) in benchmark hunting. Since one has to be quite sure of the situation by examining the site personally before logging something as destroyed, I certainly give "full credit" to a person's Destroyed count equally with their Found count. :P


I think we all need to also give deference to NorStar, an experienced benchmark hunter, and his logging MY5844 as a Didn't-find-it. (It appears that he exposed the cement from being possibly hidden under a bit of dirt.) I can see logging this as either Destroyed or Didn't find it, but not as Found-it, especially with a previous benchmark hunter not claiming Found-it, after obviously finding the same thing (it's his pictures, after all).


In conclusion, I'd suggest logging this one as Destroyed or Didn't find it, and definitely not as Found it.

Link to comment

Loch Cache -


MY5844 appears to be one of the tougher cases. Based on what I see in the photos, the precision of the local references, and the fact that the station is defined by adjusted coordinates, I would NOT take exception to a posting of "FOUND" (especially if there was evidence of the disk's stem in the concrete monument), with the comment that the (station was) "FOUND" (but the benchmark was) "DESTROYED", "DIDN'T FIND IT", "DESTROYED" or even a "NOTE" with comments describing the entire situation.


MY5844 is representative of the most frustrating benchmark hunting situation. When I search for a mark, I want to either find it in pristine condition with the stamping as clear as the day it was monumented or I want my GPS GOTO to point to the middle of a large, paved WalMart parking lot. Everything else in between (which is to say, almost everything) is work. Of course, "everything in between" is where the fun and satisfaction are as well.


For MY5844, I would probably post it as "FOUND" if I saw the end of the stem in the concrete and "DIDN'T FIND IT" if I didn't see the stem. I generally post as "DESTROYED" only intersection stations that are clearly destroyed (Exception: I have posted disks as "DESTROYED" when, after submitting description and photos via e-mail, Deb Brown at NGS asks me to.) (Well, and maybe a couple of other exceptions as well but never mind.)


I think how you log MY5844 is less important than the fact that you have contributed to the body of information about the benchmark universe through your analysis and discussion.



Link to comment

I am new to both Geocahing and benchmarking so forgive me if I speak in error.


I went after this benchmark for two reasons, one it is near to my home and therefore an area I know well; two there were pictures I knew I could look at after I tried to find it to see if I saw the same thing NorStar did. After I came back it was clear the pictures he took match what I saw.


When I went to log this I did not know what to do. I did not feel posting a "couldn't find" was quite right since I felt the other measurements pointed to it being the right marker. However, is it destroyed? If it is not destroyed because the monument is still there, then it is a find.


For now I am going to agree with Black Dog Trackers change it to a Didn't Find just as NorStar had recorded it. If someone feels it should be marked as destroyed, I will be happy to go out with tape measure and camera to document exact location to insure this is the monument and not a lot marker. I would also need to know who Deb Brown is and how to reach her with this information.

Link to comment

Loch -


Deb Brown is the person who processes all the recovery reports submitted to the NGS. When you submit a recovery report through the NGS site (if you are ever inclined to do so), Deb is the recipient at the other end. At the top of the index page for this forum, under "Important Topics", you'll see a thread on reporting to the NGS that Deb started. It's a good read.


Also, when you read posts in this forum, be aware that the several writers may each be coming from a slightly different perspective. Many of us try to adhere to the NGS standard for logging a DESTROYED, and it's a fairly high standard (as you'll come to see when you read Deb's thread). Others adhere to the Geocaching standard which, in reality, doesn't exist independent of each benchmark hunters' personal judgement. Sort of a Humpty Dumpty-ish "A "destroyed" means what I want it to mean. Nothing more, nothing less".


As I stated earlier re MY5844 (a particularly questionable case), you would not be incorrect however you logged it.



Link to comment

The usual descriptions (FOUND, NOT FOUND, DESTROYED) don't really fit the situation.


You have the option of posting a "Note" describing your encounter. Include photos when possible. True, it does not raise your "FOUND" total. However, such information would be valuable to those looking for the station in the future. This is the option I select under similar circumstances. [see sample below.]


Best regards,

Paul K5PF



Link to comment

If I may stir things up a bit...


When I'm searching for a mark, I tend to look at my findings and ask myself 'Could I use the mark, or remnants and/or evidence of the mark?', or 'Are my findings suitable for survey use?' While it is true that the disk is missing, it can be established that the found square concrete monument is the proper setting. This mark was set as vertical control and has a published horizontal order of second class. Even without the disk, the top of the setting MAY still be usable for elevation purposes. (Granted, not for high precision work, but still usable.)


On the Geocaching website I would log this as a find with a note that the disk is missing. However, I also do not disagree with logging it as not found. For reporting to the NGS, I would not report it as destroyed, but as 'Poor, disturbed, mutilated, requires maintenance'.


- Kewaneh

Link to comment

Here is an interesting thing that Deb said:


DebBrown Posted: Apr 9 2004, 12:55 PM 


If a disk is gone but the shank remains it's technically destroyed BUT the position might still be usable. I'm sure some of those are listed as destroyed in the database and if you find any let me know because I'd like to change that code to POOR and add an explanation in the text.

Edited by Black Dog Trackers
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...