US Bureau of Reclamation Benchmark to which a USGS level party ran a connection in 1957.
One of the projects I'm working on at the moment requires determining the elevations of various US Geological Survey benchmarks as they were thought to be in about 1937. I've got the sheets summarizing the leveling done in the quadrangle as of 1957 (twenty years later), but those same sheets give no indication of superceded elevations, i.e. what the elevations of the benchmarks would have been thought to have been about twenty years earlier.
I've looked at the USGS webpage, but didn't see any obvious link to the historical data I'm after. Can anyone suggest a contact at USGS or some other way to get at the (presumably) superceded historical elevations of various USGS benchmarks in Western Travis County, Texas?
I would start with the second bullet on this page.
For USGS, this is the earlier leveling information.
USGS Spirit Leveling Texas 1895-1915
Kurt
USGS Bulletin No. 883 (issued in five volumes)
883-A Part 1, Western Texas, 1896-1935. 1937 pg.1-50
883-B Part 2, Panhandle, 1896-1939. 1941 pg.51-149
883-C Part 3, West-central Texas, 1896-1938. 1941 pg.151-239
883-D Part 4, North-central Texas, 1896-1938. 1942 pg.241-559
883-E Part 5, South-central Texas, 1896-1938. 1937 pg.561-789
For example:
http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/b883A
This should do it:
http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/b883E
Or maybe this one (Texas counties are REALLY small!)
http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/b883D
I'm surprised
You would think that a professional surveyor as intelligent as Kent would know that bench mark, in this context, is two words, not one. There is a reason the cap is stamped B.M.
I see this mistake all the time in everything from field notes, to emails, to national publications. You would think surveyors would know better???
Just a pet peeve.
Carry on.
I've had some luck calling the USGS local office but it often takes a long time for them to track down any data. In our area, and probably yours, they published books of level results (not notes unfortunately of the raw data). At least though you get a datum and date.
I'm surprised
> I see this mistake all the time in everything from field notes, to emails, to national publications. You would think surveyors would know better???
More people for you to scold. These too
Carry On 😉
Dale Benson
U.S. Geological Survey
(303) 202-4394
> USGS Bulletin No. 883 (issued in five volumes)
> 883-D Part 4, North-central Texas, 1896-1938. 1942 pg.241-559
>> http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/b883Dbr >
Okay, that's a winner. That publication is EXACTLY what I was looking for.
Thanks and sorry to hear that you're used to life in a state where basically no one lives, so counties aren't sized with the idea of residents being able to travel to and from the county seat to conduct business. :>
I'm surprised
Already have. The NGS Geodetic Advisor's office is right next to mine. Every time I see this error in one of their documents, I point it out to her. Fortunately, she knows better. 🙂
As you were.
I'm surprised>What context
".... bench mark, in this context, is two words, not one."
In what context is it one word? I'm curious now, having always used it as one word...
From Wiki "The term bench mark, or benchmark, originates from the chiseled horizontal marks that surveyors made in stone structures, into which an angle-iron could be placed to form a "bench" for a leveling rod, thus ensuring that a leveling rod could be accurately repositioned in the same place in the future. These marks were usually indicated with a chiseled arrow below the horizontal line."
I'm surprised>What context
The physical mark is a bench mark. When you run a test on your CPU to check the processing speed, that is a benchmark test.
I have it on good authority that Dale Benson at USGS will retire on or about January 3. He's been a great reason and that knowledge will not be perpetuated by USGS.
OH NO! Dale has been the ONLY person at USGS that I've EVER been able to get information from!
ARRGGHH!!!