Rats, I was hoping you were sharing a bunch of photos of a recent recovery of an original mineral survey corner that was monumented with a wood post.
The tell in the Wiki article is that there are no citations! And one would think that archeologists meticulously document their work.....sigh!
Rats...
My comment is to avoid all wood post originals. Unless there is a dozer nearby.
My comment is to avoid all wood post originals. Unless there is a dozer nearby.
Where's your sense of adventure!
?resize=500%2C200
?ÿ
@gene-kooper I agree! This page has been around awhile, but has been expanded recently. In any case, I do find it interesting and "somewhat" informative.
@dougie?ÿ
I really love the wood post originals with a stone buried 12" deep alongside. Those are the best. Most of them around here are along the face of the mountain which is basically an uptapped gravel pit made up of limestone. Of course most of the stones buried 12" deep were called out as limestone.?ÿ
As a recovered archaeologist, this article looks to be overwhelmingly accurate.?ÿ There is more to it but this hits most of the important aspects.?ÿ If you want references for this information, any archaeology 101 textbook would do, or a methods textbook/article/class, or most often field school.?ÿ
For archaeologists completing this type of work and documenting it, yes, there would be reams of paperwork and documentation produced for the excavation of one post hole (which may take more than 8 hours).?ÿ Sometimes we even use lidar on things like this.?ÿ
?ÿ
Dykes v. Arnold includes the careful excavation of a wooden stake.?ÿ
?ÿ
Generally as a recovered archaeologist, I've thought that surveyors could use a higher standard of excavation but even more so, documentation!?ÿ The recovery of original evidence that we do as surveyors is entirely substandard in the world of archaeology.?ÿ Yes, we don't need to spend hours, days, or weeks carefully excavating a few inches of soil with a paintbrush, but we could take a few more photos and adopt some other standard documentation standards.?ÿ
?ÿ
Now heading down a tangent, I've often thought that surveyors looking to grow the profession should be recruiting from archaeology programs, not GIS or other programs.?ÿ Archaeologists are well trained in the historical record, proper research, using multiple lines of evidence, proper excavation and documentation, sound reasoning, often total stations and resource grade GPS, orienteering, GIS, solar flares, dendro(chrono)logy, and a variety of other things too.?ÿ I've also thought that any decent surveying program should require students to take a 6 week archaeology field school.
?ÿ
?ÿ
With out going into a long story??
100 years ago a wooden post was set at a new boundary point, a big redwood stump BT was faced and scribed with the initials of two lumber companies.
sometime in the 1950s unknown foresters replaced the post with a concrete monument.
50 years ago Knute Nelson set a concrete post here on a Record of Survey, nothing about the other information on the map, just it is here I set it, I found Knute??s rather detailed field notes and calculations and sketches which is how I found out about the BT and that he pulled the concrete monument and moved it 14 feet. The BT is there but the blaze has obviously had the scribing cut out.
I also found the post hole, still there.
The recovery of ancient (in relative terms) evidence of Wood Post Monuments requires not only careful excavation and analysis, but also the BELIEF that it is possible. Over the years I have told surveyors stories of successful recoveries, but many surveyors don't really BELIEVE that is very practical (or even probable). Once you get "them" in the field, and show them how it's done, a light bulb goes off, and they become believers! At that point, they get themselves a tile probe, wisp broom, trowel, etc. and realize that spending time on your knees carefully "excavating" can return results that are well worth the time and effort.
Basically, you can't find that which you don't (conscientiously) look for. It also helps (a LOT) if you know what "IT" looks like.
Loyal
One of the most rewarding monument recoveries for me was a mining claim corner in the edge of an old jeep/mine road. The claim owner was standing by and stated that no corner had been there for the sixty years he had been on the property. We excavated a circle of about ten feet diameter about six inches deep and I proceeded to stab a range pole into the ground until it hit a void. Further excavation revealed a square hole about 18" deep with no wood remnants. The owner was amazed and we were pretty thrilled by the discovery also. Still makes me smile to recall that day.
The recovery of ancient (in relative terms) evidence of Wood Post Monuments requires not only careful excavation and analysis, but also the BELIEF that it is possible. Over the years I have told surveyors stories of successful recoveries, but many surveyors don't really BELIEVE that is very practical (or even probable). Once you get "them" in the field, and show them how it's done, a light bulb goes off, and they become believers! At that point, they get themselves a tile probe, wisp broom, trowel, etc. and realize that spending time on your knees carefully "excavating" can return results that are well worth the time and effort.
Basically, you can't find that which you don't (conscientiously) look for. It also helps (a LOT) if you know what "IT" looks like.
Loyal
Yes, belief (best if based on training and experience) that it is possible (and worthwhile) is critical.?ÿ (Hopefully this line of reasoning doesn't get picked up by the bigfoot thread...)
I've also thought that any decent surveying program should require students to take a 6 week archaeology field school.
I think an archaeology field school is the best available formal method to learn these skills (and get a lot of experience too).?ÿ You (and some other surveyors) have these skills and experience but it is by no means a given that most or even many surveyors will have these skills and experience.?ÿ Good for you for training people and turning that light bulb on!?ÿ
?ÿ
Here you go, Gene.?ÿ Found some a couple months ago retracing a claim up in Pike NF.?ÿ Only one post remained intact.
@horseshoes-handgrenades Nice find for a post set in 1897.
IMWTO....did you find a big spruce BT to the SE?
@gene-kooper I was surprised to find one upright.?ÿ We found BTs present at about half the corners.?ÿ Some intact, some rotting.
