Should Gc Pages Have A Link To Ngs Mark Recovery?

[+Black Dog Trackers]

I hope the title of this topic captured the idea pretty well from the discussion that originiated in this topic.

 

I will make a separate new topic for the other discussion from that topic:

Ideas For Re-designing G.C. Benchmark Pages; auto-import to get latest NGS PID data.

 

Any further discussion about remaking an NGS CD would remain in the original topic.

 

This topic is for continuing the discussion on whether it would be a good thing to provide a link on GC benchmark pages to do a mark recovery on the NGS mark recovery page or perhaps some other way to effect a logging at the NGS.

[GH55]

I have seen way too many bogus recoveries on geocaching.

 

Providing that link would be an invitation to increase the bogus recoveries submitted to NGS, thus degrading the quality of the NGS database.

 

Some things need to take a bit of extra effort for those truly interested. This is one of them.

[ArtMan]

As I believe I posted in the previous thread, I agree with GH55.

 

I am concerned that if filing an NGS recovery report is too easy (although admittedly, many will be dissuaded from the style of and information requested at the NGS recovery form page), too many uber-casual Geocacher-types will enter dubious reports.

 

I know there is human review at NGS, but I don't think we what to overwhelm Deb with weeding out inappropriate reports. And there is no way for her to know that a simple "found" report (without additional text) really represents discovery of a reference mark or reset.

 

In my opinion, maintaining the integrity of NGS data is paramount.

 

-Art-

[kc2ixe]

I'll agree - it's easy enough as it is - let's NOT make it easy to submit bogus info

[Bill93]

NGS has supplied us an adequate method for logging (even gave us a GEOCAC button). We do not need to make it easier by linking from GC, it's easy enough.

 

We don't want to make it so easy that people won't take it seriously. The confusion of too many casual reports will take more of a toll than the benefit of an increase in good reports.

 

If one of the goals is to recruit more serious folks to report to NGS, that might be furthered by including an obvious link on each benchmark page titled something like "Learn how to submit your recoveries to NGS" and directed to the benchmarking FAQ and/or this forum.

[+BuckBrooke]

Not to overwhelm those who want the link, but I agree that we should be very wary. The quality of the database is paramount to me.

 

I like the idea of having an in between page, where people who aren't familar with what the NGS wants can be educated. This page might have pertinent portions of the FAQ and additions we create. Will they just skip by this and go straight on to the NGS page?

[+Black Dog Trackers]

I reviewed the current GC benchmark FAQ page today. In the section (near the end of the FAQ) called "Can I log an official report to the NGS", the link there is not to the NGS mark recovery page, but instead to GC's National Geodetic Survey forum, saying to look at the pinned FAQ thread there.

 

I think it is good that the mention of logging at the NGS is after most of the regular benchmark hunting FAQ has been read, and the link there points to the more specific NGS logging FAQ instead of a direct link to the mark recovery page. This way GC is giving the fairly clear idea that there is some reading and learning to do before NGS logging.

Edited May 27, 2005 by Black Dog Trackers

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

I think it would be a whole lot easier to educate the surveyor community about the Geocaching benchmark logs than to educate all the Geocachers about NGS rules.

 

If we can educate the surveyors about our database, then they can check it for current finds / not founds for any given benchmark and not risk corrupting the NGS database.

 

They don't even have to be Geocaching members to use our database!

 

John

[evenfall]

Sorry John, Tens of thousands of Surveyors are not going to Look to the Unofficial Geocaching website as a source for Data. NGS is the source for the data and they make the rules. They are the chief certifier for this data. There could be some symbiotic relationship, and we are forming them now, but I am sorry, That is a lot of cultural pattern to change. I don't really think it is doable. I think of it as being similar to asking you and Shirley to submit your 495 finds to NGS. I know better than to go there! :-D

 

I admire everyones desire to be protective of the NGS Database, But...

 

Let us all be reminded that all submitted recoveries are read by Debbie Brown before they make it in to the Database so the integrity is High. She has read a few recoveries in her Career, she ok'd all of the ones you have submitted. It is not automatic. She is one of the watchdogs your recovery must pass. All Recoveries will be read by her and or someone helping her.

 

Make no mistake, We are not the gatekeepers here. The NGS is. It is not up to us to second guess what NGS wants, They can read what is submitted for themselves. They are a 200 year old agency and I am sure they are up to it.

 

If I take your collective feelings about this as gospel, then the recovery of the entire country will be via: 236 some odd Geocachers: 6230 total recoveries to date. That is 1/5 of the geocacher totals. If I round down to 200 geocachers, and it is likely less than that actively, then that makes 4 people per State. And we all know many States are not seeing recoveries. So How can we improve this situation? I know Washington DC and NYC see a lot of action, Boston may be seeing it too, but what about Orlando and Dallas? How can we inspirer people to join in?

 

There are 169629 active caches in 215 countries. 236 Benchmark hunters recovering to NGS in 25 states if we are lucky... Hrmmmmmmm :-D There are almost more countries involved in geocaching than there are people doing NGS recovery...

 

Hey! I learned to use statistics like these from you guys!! heheheh!

 

I am sorry but I have a historical a synopsis of the situation here at the benchmark hunting Forum, based on where I have seen resistance as an agent of change. First I saw a large amount of resistance to the idea of submitting anything to NGS, A great many people were Vehemently opposed to sending Info in to NGS. There was also resistance to starting this Forum too. Now, those of you who will send data to NGS want it cleared through you first? Or if not cleared through you first you would like it to be difficult to figure out how. People have to go through the rites of passage before they can Volunteer? How can you account for all the recoveries that no one here was able to oversee? Truth is, No one can.

 

I proposed in the previous thread that BDT started this on as a spin off for discussing this, that if NGS were to make recovery page, made just for the geocaching website, and provide a link to it, where all a non trained geocacher could do if they so wished is enter the PID and submit the following info: Found on the current date. That is it. What I mean is; you enter a PID an email address and click an enter button They either found it or they cannot submit. They would not be able to submit a narrative recovery nor make any other kind of judgment. That system could be designed so as it would allow no more than one found recovery per calendar year.

 

WHY do I propose this? Because NGS would really like to know which stations are still out there, and they will not find out much if we dictate to them who is allowed to recover them. Let people decide if they want to share with NGS for themselves and NGS can handle the screening. I think NGS Is up to the task. As a side note, I am in the NGS Forum Discussing NGS recovery so I figure I don't have to add the clause if you want to. I figure if you are here, then you came to play. We are already beyond that formality.

 

There are ways to do this without allowing much harm, and that is what I am proposing. Some stations will likely never be recovered ever, otherwise. If a person decides they want to provide a Higher quality recovery, They may wind up here and read our discussions. I'll let you in on this though, if they ask Casey how, He will share. You know why? He has already done this in his FAQ:

 

Q: Where do I submit reports to NGS?

 

A: NGS has an on-line mark recovery page. To submit a report, just visit http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/FORMS_PROCESSING-c...y_entry_www.prl

 

So, Now, Based on what I have defined, what would be the harm of making it easy to submit a simple find as I have outlined?

 

Rob

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

Rob, you missed the point again!

 

The idea for surveyors to check the Geocaching site is to see if the benchmark has been found recently. Nothing more and nothing less.

 

If someone logs an RM by mistake then the surveyor will be able to use that info to locate where the station is located.

 

John

[evenfall]

No John,

 

I know what you are saying, But I know how surveyors are, They won't do it. <shrugs> What do you want me to say? You'll get a few. Look , I am here but you won't turn Many.

 

I know these people I have worked with them for years. You will not convince the lion's share of them to check here. I am sorry if you can't accept my answer, but go try and convince them yourself. Afterwards we can have a Beer and Laugh.

 

Hell, I cannot even convince you of anything whatsoever, so what makes you think you are going to convince tens of thousands of Surveyors to look in on a few hundred Geocachers? :-D

 

Sure your Idea has merit John, If that is what you want to hear, but if you got 1% to do it, you'd be lucky. How shall we contact all of them? That's a good Logistics Puzzle if anyone feels like solving it.

Easier than getting a few hundred Geocachers to realize that the Survey world is based on and full of nothing but a ton of confusing rules that we all have to follow? Not to mention it too has it's own Culture like any profession does...

 

On the other hand we could try to improve the NGS Database in the ways we do. It makes it better for all who look into it.

 

Rob

[+bicknell]

Back to the original point. I would LOVE to have links direct to submit NGS recovery. Anything to streamline my workflow is a good thing. Logging is a lot of work. I understand the desire not to encourage everyone to go to the NGS, so I'm open to ideas. Perhaps after 50 geocaching.com benchmark recoverys the link to the NGS appears. For all of us, it's a link, for new people who make 50 recoveries it's a hint that they may now be experienced enough to make NGS entries.

[+cantuland]

I am a licensed surveyor. I have used NGS bench mark information to let me know where to HOPE to find a bench mark. I look for data on any and all BMs in my work area, NGS or otherwise, because too many times the closest BM on record is gone. Sometimes the BM is there. Sometimes it isn't. The NGS data is just another tool to find a known elevation nearby, albeit a trustworthy one. For me, if I have to use an NGS BM, it's because closer BMs are gone, or my job is lucky to have one nearby.

 

Now that I am a geocacher, too, I know to look at GeoCaching.com to get more data on NGS BMs. I think geocachers are more likely to log a found NGS BM at Geocaching.com, than a surveyor is to log a found NGS BM with NGS. Geocaching.com thus becomes an additional tool, a second opinion that is more up to date, even if prone to inaccuracies. If someone really wants to do the research, they will check with Geocaching.com in addition to NGS, as well as with city or county bench mark information. The more data you have available, the more options you have available when you do the job.

 

The problem is that a typical surveyor has no idea that Geocaching.com exists. I can't even access the site at work due to network security measures. Geocaching.com at the moment doesn't help me much when it comes to researching found or not found. It is a great help when it comes to downloading whole counties' worth of coordinates to stuff into my personal hand-held Garmin. When I hear about a new job around the state, I can check my hand-held for just that much more data since it's available. Not much NGS info has been logged on Geocaching.com for my area, but I am a surveyor and I am a geocacher. Therefore, Geocaching.com is a place where I can contribute to my profession, so that others will benefit from it later.

 

Geocaching is new. Surveying is ancient. GPS technology in surveying (the really expensive stuff) is new and is climbing in popularity. As more surveyors use GPS, more technicians will use GPS. As more technicians use GPS, GPS related topics (like Geocaching.com) will become more common to the rest of the population. Someday (maybe) the general population will have super-accurate hand-held GPS receivers in a tool box right next to a pocket-sized measuring tape. If that day comes, everyone, including Joe Blow Surveyor, will know to check with Geocaching.com when they need extra NGS data. Ha! Ha! Don't give up. Just keep logging your finds.

 

cantuland

[evenfall]

Welcome Cantland,

 

And thanks for your input as to how the culture of Surveyors can be. I know it is a topic of shop talk in my circles. I know many old dogs who are being dragged kicking and screaming into all the many new tricks, and it is happening so fast now it is hard to keep up. Some will be hard pressed to change...

 

Enjoy, and again welcome.

 

Rob

[Wintertime]

I proposed in the previous thread that BDT started this on as a spin off for discussing this, that if NGS were to make recovery page, made just for the geocaching website, and provide a link to it, where all a non trained geocacher could do if they so wished is enter the PID and submit the following info:  Found on  the current date. That is it. What I mean is; you enter a PID an email address and click an enter button They either found it  or they cannot submit.  They would not be able to submit a narrative recovery nor make any other kind of judgment. That system could be designed so as it would allow no more than one found recovery per calendar year.

 

So, Now, Based on what I have defined, what would be the harm of making it easy to submit a simple find as I have outlined?

I can think of one possible problem right away: people accidentally logging a "Found" a benchmark that no longer exists. As you know, Rob, someone just asked a question about TU1337 on Diamond Head. *Forty* geocachers have logged "Found" reports for that benchmark, but the mark that's there now is *not* TU1337, but instead a 2002 reset mark that has no PID.

 

If there were a link directly to an NGS recovery reporting page with no intervening FAQ or checklist for reading first, I guarantee that some of those 40 people would have reported that TU1337 is still there. As you know, Rob, we've had the same situation with a mark near me that some geocachers are logging even though not only is it a reset mark that has no PID, it's 500 feet away from the original mark!

 

I recently found a mark in Sonora, California that I at first thought was the original. But then I realized that it was in fact an undated reset with slightly different stamping. When a mark is in exactly the same location as the one mentioned on an NGS datasheet, it's easy to take it for the original if you don't look very closely--or if you've never been introduced to the concept that a datasheet refers not just to a specific location, but to a specific mark, so if the old mark no longer exists, you can't report the new one in its stead. (Unless, of course, the new mark has its own PID.)

 

I'm all for helping other geocachers file reports with NGS, but we need to make sure that they understand a few basic concepts before they do. Maybe all it takes is a checklist before they type in the date and click "Submit." But just jumping directly to a data-entry page from the mark's page on GC.com sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.

 

Patty

[evenfall]

Patty,

 

We could dream as big as we like.

 

If we could be more helpful and inclusive towards NGS recovery, and we could build it any way we liked, How would we build it? You want a FAQ you have to pass through in order to submit a recovery to NGS? Done!

 

Sky is the limit. Design it the way it would really work and work well, or...

 

Or leave it as it is...

 

If were were creative and we could place the safeguards people feel are needed, what would then be the harm?

 

What would it take to make it really work?

 

Rob

[caseyb]

I reviewed the current GC benchmark FAQ page today.  In the section (near the end of the FAQ) called "Can I log an official report to the NGS", the link there is not to the NGS mark recovery page, but instead to GC's National Geodetic Survey forum, saying to look at the pinned FAQ thread there.

I was wondering if anybody would ever notice that. I had Jeremy make that change a while ago. I borrowed a few sentences from somebody in this forum when I wrote it.

 

I am not in favor of having a direct link to the NGS recovery page on a gc.com recovery page. I much prefer linking somebody to the NGS forum and having them read the FAQ. If we want to include a link to the FAQ, and this forum, I would be all for it.

 

-Casey-

Edited May 31, 2005 by caseyb

[evenfall]

Ok Casey, Thanks for your input.

 

It appears doable with a FAQ that must be passed through to get to the link. That certainly seems appropriate.

 

Any Thoughts?

 

Rob