Lewis And Clark Benchmarks

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

In the new US recovered benchmarks, I am seeing a few Lewis and Clark benchmarks. This is something the NGS is promoting as a special commerative benchmark. Is this specialized enough to warrant its own category?

[+seventhings]

In celebration of the 200th anniversary of the Corps of Discovery (Lewis and Clark expedition), the NGS and surveying-related state agencies are sponsoring a series of commemorative disks. When the program is completed in September, 2006, there will be about 30 such stations. Some are established in coordination with the NGS and some are established by state agencies or local surveyors only (that's why it's so hard to know the exact number). There may be more commemorative disks out there that locals have set that neither I nor the NGS nor anyone else in the benchmark hunting community know about. But, in any event, the actual number probably does not/will not exceed 50.

 

The plan is for each disk to have its own PID eventually, at least for the ones set in coordination with the NGS. That is, each disk will eventually become a geodetic control point listed in the NGS database. About one-half have been documented for NGS inclusion so far (10 of 21 that I've found). Documenting the rest depends on the state and local agencies, so they may or may not ever become geodetic control points with PIDs.

 

The first disk was dedicated at Monticello, VA, in January, 2003. The last will be at St. Louis, MO, on Sep, 23, 2006.

 

Since the universe of these disks is limited with respect to number, location (along and related to Lewis and Clark's route), and time, my opinion is that they don't deserve their own sub-category. Since most will be geodetic control points not in the Geocaching database, they fit perfectly into the Recovered US Benchmarks category.

 

That's just my two cents.

 

Will

p.s. wordy for the benefit of those unfamiliar with the program.

Edited November 26, 2005 by seventhings

[+Jake39]

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

Since the universe of these disks is limited with respect to number, location (along and related to Lewis and Clark's route), and time, my opinion is that they don't deserve their own sub-category. Since most will be geodetic control points not in the Geocaching database, they fit perfectly into the Recovered US Benchmarks category.

You could say the same for Disney benchmarks, but they have their own special category too.

[+seventhings]

Excellent point!

 

I know that Wintertime has a Disney mark website, but I did not know that those marks had their own Waymarking category. I can't see it/find it on my view of the directory, where is it??

 

Will

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

According to this thread:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...13367&hl=disney

 

this will be a category as soon as the guidelines are set up. Jeremy already approved it as a category. The recovered US benchmark category states:

 

This category will not accept Disney benchmark disks since there is a special category for them. They should be waymarked and logged in the Disney Benchmark category.

 

Not sure how long it will take to get posted, but it seems like Disney has been approved as a category prior to the end of beta testing.

[+Black Dog Trackers]

This is a good question for the entire concept of Waymarking. What is the exact difference between:

a category

a sub-category

a variable in a category

a different category

?

 

The only one I know explicitly is that if there is a category that can/will have subcategories then that category can't have any waymarks on its own; all the waymarks must be in the sub-categories.

 

I see no particular logic, except by using some kind of popularity measure, defining whether or not Disney benchmarks, Lewis and Clark benchmarks, Mountain summit benchmarks, Center of Population benchmarks, etc., should or should not be: different categories, different sub-categories (of all US Benchmarks, of which both Recovered US Benchmarks and the NGS benchmarks would be sub-categories), or different variables under Recovered US Benchmarks, or perhaps all of the above (!). One could think of many other possible subcategorizations of benchmarks. Someone else could think of some more.

 

Jeremy has made it clear in the forums (I forget the reference just now) that items certainly could be waymarked in more than one category if they meet each category's criteria, and that is perfectly allowable.

 

In deference to the new (destined, but not quite here yet) Disney Benchmarks category, I explicitly stated that Disney Benchmarks would not be accepted and that such benchmarks should be waymarked in the Disney Benchmarks category.

 

Perhaps that was a mistake on my part because it isn't in accordance with the concept of Waymarking and that I could instead allow them and even create an option in the "Special category" variable for Disney Benchmarks. I could certainly do that. In that case, when someone found a Disney benchmark, they could waymark it in either the Recovered US Benchmarks category, or the Disney Benchmarks category or both.

 

I do think that category proposals are supposed to (in the future, not now) be subject to some sort of popularity contest before a decision is made to create a category for them. Possibly some aspect of the popularity contest would be a consideration (by the 'voters'?) of whether or not the concept is more of a sub-category or variable of an existing category. If people didn't 'vote' for the proposal, it wouldn't necessarily be because they weren't interested in the items, but that they figured it should be a sub-category or variable in an existing category and didn't need to be a new and separate category.

 

I don't know the answer to this; I am not an author of the Waymarking concept.

[+Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking]

For the Lewis and Clark, and the Center of Population benchmarks, these are special categories within the NGS database that isnt available on geocaching's benchmarking database. That was why I thought they should be seperate. I also thought it would be easier for those who are just browsing through the waymarks. I would want to them, and would only have physical access to the Arizona center of population. Currently, having to wade through all of the vague benchmark listings that will eventually amount to 1000s easily, is just too hard to browse. I realize the capabilites will exist at some future point (2 months? 2 years?) to filter out by variables, but will they be caught by that filtering? Or are the waymarks too new to have that variable added to them? If Disney is a seperate category because of its uniqueness, so should Lewis and Clark and Center of Population benchmarks.

 

Im not trying to be difficult. Im just thinking of those who might want to browse the categories. So far it isnt too user friendly to browse any category.

[+Black Dog Trackers]

Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking -

 

Some of the Lewis and Clark marks are in the NGS database, but too new to be in GC.com's circa 2000 copy of the NGS database, so they are being waymarked.

 

I don't remember whether or not the Center of Population marks but I suspect they are since I seem to recall that DaveD of the NGS was involved in setting some of them.

 

Before starting on the category I did read that variables will eventually be usable to filter the waymark database, acting as subcategories. That's why I put the "Special category" variable in the list of variables that I included for the cateogory. I also put in another variable: "Special category (if other)" so that people can signal me that a new Special category probably should be included in the Special category dropdown list. I hope what I've done works OK.

 

I don't think that your raising your points as being difficult at all. The category proposal-and-acceptance is in Beta as we all know, and instead of being difficult, your points are part of the evolution and exploration of that concept, in my opinion.

[+Black Dog Trackers]

Concerning the Center of Population markers, BuckBrooke has made an excellent website dedicated to them.

 

I drove by the 1820 marker recently - it is a historical marker and it has been stolen (broken off by force). I believe there is no geodetic mark at this spot, only the historical marker (or its remains). According to BuckBrooke's excellent research shown in his website, only the centers from 1960 on are in the NGS database. Some of the ones before 1960 have markers and some may not. A marker that is a geodetic marker (having an exact center point with measured coordinates) would qualify for Recovered US Benchmarks in my opinion. However, just a historical marker would not, since it would likely not have any 'center' of it and might not even be in the exact spot. If many of the years have no geodetic marker, then I think there should be a separate category for them! In such a case, the ones from 1960 on are fair game for both categories. Some of the really old ones might have no marker at all and someone could waymark them based on research and photograph an empty pasture or whatever scenery is at the spot. The center of population concept might have counterparts in other countries (like Canada) and even US states.

 

By the way, I will take this opportunity to restate my observation on the center of population map (BuckBrooke's site has the link) - the center of population is still moving at the same rate from 1790 to 2000, so it would seem that the settlement of the U.S. is still happening.

[+GEO*Trailblazer 1]

It looks good where it is.

Edited this post after looking at the Benchmark category.

Edited November 28, 2005 by GEO*Trailblazer 1

[+Team GeoDuo]

Bump,

 

So that the Lewis and Clark Proposals are together.

Edited March 14, 2006 by Team GeoDuo