Manville Possum Hunters wrote:... or is actually visiting a BM part of the requirement to list them here?
See post #1:
Mr.Yuck wrote:This is coming!! Hopefully before the 1st of the year, we hope to have them fully implemented.
Background: The Groundspeak site used(s) only NGS Benchmarks (National Geodetic Survey), which of course are U.S. only. The rest of the world was left out. Not to mention in the U.S. there are State and local benchmarks, as well as Army Corps of Engineers benchmarks. Maybe more? I was never a benchmark expert.
The benchmark cache type was first proposed by former admin NativTxn probably in 2010 or 2011. The original chief site admin actually didn't like the idea at the time. However, he's long since retired, and the 3 current admins are totally on board with this idea.
Rules? Of course there will be rules. OK, guidelines.
The first (and we hope most obvious one) will be no armchair cache creations. You must have visited yourself. No copying Benchmarks off of Waymarking.com.
Comments? This is the place.
I have suggestions, they can be used or ignored, but this one is a must so I was happy to see that in the first post. I once went hunting for a number of benchmarks listed on Waymarking and all the coordinates took me to pointless locations - I suspect those benchmarks were posted using database data only, which for most horizontal control benchmarks the posted coordinates are "scaled from maps" and might be off by a few hundred meters.
Okay, a little strapped for time tonight so I will try to quickly list my other suggestions. Just thoughts / ideas.
1) no proximity limits for clearly different benchmarks. Usually they are miles apart, but occasionally they are a few feet apart or even less. If it has a unique number / name, let it stand on it's own. This will include reset disks and azimuth marks.
Example showing two unique benchmarks (one is a plate and one is a bolt) side-by-side) https://s3.amazonaws.com/gs-waymarking-images/46069115-d078-4510-98f2-b558219ccdfe.JPG
2) Any benchmark currently listed as a virtual should not also be listed as a benchmark. It's one or the other.
3) Benchmarks that are not "national: in origin should also be accept as long as they are permanent. Some examples:
Ontario Ministry of Transportation and Communications benchmarkhttps://s3.amazonaws.com/gs-waymarking-images/d7fd2013-16d9-4698-b171-8630c90dab5f.jpg
City of Hamilton benchmark:https://s3.amazonaws.com/gs-waymarking-images/e178493c-9750-4eca-9233-6c9fb6538628.JPG
4) This is important - any benchmark can only be listed if it is safely and legally accessible! There are many that exist that are not accessible.
5) Some benchmark don;t have the identifying number stamped into them, but they are still benchmarks:
U.S. Department of the Interior Mark - Yosemite, CAhttps://s3.amazonaws.com/gs-waymarking-images/002cd1f5-be89-4f91-90a1-1d188e3eae61.jpeg
6) There should be a standard way to naming the listing. Unique number if there is one maybe.
7) If there is a disk that is hard to reach, such as up high on a monument or lighthouse (see examples), you can only post the BM and/or can only log a visit if you actually get to that disk. A photo of the monument from 50 feet away is no going to cut it.http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WMEZ ... k_New_Yorkhttp://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WMBZ ... eights_Ont
I don't think the OCNA-only attribute is appropriate for any of these.
What do I think is required for a listing?:
Designation / PID
Web address of this benchmark's datasheet
A description of the location and how to reach it (I think it was MPH who made that great suggestion)
And I think a photo of the benchmark with you or GPS should be required to log a visit. Or a photo at min. I don't think the markings on the benchmark can be used as a logging password since all that info will be available online (typically). And I think most benchmark enthusiasts are already used to the photo requirement.
Thanks for listening.