Trig points - a general discussion

[pjw]

What constitutes a trig point certainly remains a hot topic but my view is that if is designated as a trig point by an appropriate authority then so be it. Some have debated some of my finds in the ACT which don't look like a traditional trig but are designated as such by the ACT planning authority. I use their database to adjudicate for me.

http://www.actmapi.act.gov.au/commands/ ... s_list.asp

In any case, people worry way too much about what others are chasing. I don't think anyone is making a living doing this. Enjoy what you do, play nicely with the other kids and enjoy the fact that we have a forum where we can share our adventures with others.

[pjmpjm]

my view is that if is designated as a trig point by an appropriate authority then so be it.

Yep. Agree completely.

And trigs are indeed a lot of fun.

Highly recommended to those who've never tried them . . .

[rogerw3]

I am finding Trigs to be quite addictive, and for me at least , dare I say it! more fun than actual caches!
They are little bit of history scattered all over the place, some of those bush Trigs can be very rewarding.
Try it you will like it!

[pjw]

Exactly!!! For me it's primarily about the journey, the challenge, fitness, honing my navigation skills (which I need for my work), great views of the landscape and some history. I've only done trigs and currently ain't interested in mainstream GC.

[pjmpjm]

Exactly!!! For me it's primarily about the journey, the challenge, fitness, honing my navigation skills (which I need for my work), great views of the landscape and some history. I've only done trigs and currently ain't interested in mainstream GC.

Great to hear about this interest. I think there are a growing number of trig aficionados in the GCA ranks.

You probably already know all about State Survey Markers, Gravity Stations, and the like. These are mainly all individually numbered and have their own respective GCA 'locationless' catergories. However, unlike ordinary locationless caches, each actually has a very specific location.

But I'll mention these 'junior trigs' here for the edification of others.

[pjw]

I was not aware of those other categories but that's good to see. If you want to see an interesting debate re trigs have a look at the 'Gungahlin Trig'. The self appointed trig police have declared war on me again. Sad really.

[MtnLioness]

Sad?

I would expect that people who had been in the game longer and been 'around the block a couple thousand times' so to speak would have some knowledge on the matter.

How does one "find" a trig that has no physical plate, mark or point in the area of which it is supposed to be?

By that standard, one could "find" a Unicorn!

[caughtatwork]

Sad?

I would expect that people who had been in the game longer and been 'around the block a couple thousand times' so to speak would have some knowledge on the matter.

How does one "find" a trig that has no physical plate, mark or point in the area of which it is supposed to be?

By that standard, one could "find" a Unicorn!

If you can take a picture of a unicorn, you can find it.
There is a picture of "something" on that listing.
Whether it's a trig, unicorn or something else can be debated, but he's got a shot of something that according to the ACT database is a trig (code MC).

[pjw]

Exactly. If I find nothing there that is clearly intended to identify the location of the trig then it's listed as DNF. A yellow post with the name of the trig on it and a bolt concreted in the ground at the exact position a trig point is recorded as being by the ACT Planning Authority is more than enough evidence for me to list the trig point as found.
Are we debating whether that specific point on the earths surface is a trig point? If so then that indicates the ACT Planning Authorities survey control database is incorrect. We have no evidence to suggest this but in fact some to refute it, being the concrete post labelled with the trig name at the exact position specified.
Or are we debating that the concrete yellow post in the middle of a patch of bush is not the trig marker? That would have to be the biggest coincidence of all time! Using my GPS (which it told me was accurate to 3 meters at the time) I go into the bush to a very accurate position where credible records indicate a trig existed, and I find a yellow post with the name of the trig stenciled on it and a bolt concreted into the ground.
I don't understand which part of this issue is in question?
I'm quite confident that any trig I log as found is valid because for me to log it as such two non-related things must occur;
1. I identify via maps, authority database, GIS data or other records that a trig point exists at a specific location AND,
2. I navigate to the location AND visually confirm some evidence at that exact position of a trig point existing there (cairn, pillar, plate, post, etc.).
The chances of both of these things occurring and the evidence found not being indicative of a trig point would be remote. The only likely error I see would be if my initial research was based on flawed data and the position was not a trig point but some other survey mark. I considered this with the Gungahlin trig but two other things suggest it's a trig. NSW topo maps generally only indicate major geodetic survey points (trig stations) and not lesser, more common survey marks. Also, the ACTPLA database describes the markings use on other survey marks with yellow posts. These typically include a couple of letters then numbers. These were not on the posts at the Gungahlin trig. I'm familiar with these other survey marks and the Gungahlin point was not consistent with these. I also think the name of the trig stenciled on the posts supports it being intended to mark the location of the Gungahlin trig.

[budgietas]

Seems unusual to be ftf on a cache of your own making. Actually being a finder of your own cache in general. Be it a trig or a regular cache

[caughtatwork]

I wouldn't say that. If a TP isn't listed and you find it, then you are FTF. If it isn't listed, then you list it. This is a little different to finding your own cache I would think.

[rogerw3]

I wouldn't say that. If a TP isn't listed and you find it, then you are FTF. If it isn't listed, then you list it. This is a little different to finding your own cache I would think.

I agree, after all you did not place it, you had to go and find it, and while it may seem easy, not all unlisted Trigs are just drive by. Some do require a lot of work to find the coords, usually worked out from old maps and that can be a problem.

[pjw]

That's the way I look at. The 'caches' are already there and their existence is no secret. It just requires the effort to get to them. And you're right, in some cases it's quite a bit of effort to get there. For me that's part of the attraction. I wouldn't be doing trigs if they were all drive by jobs.
You'll also notice when you list a trig point cache it is recorded as a GCA cache. I don't get the credit for creating the cache because it's obviously not mine. My GCA account shows me as creating no caches. There are also a number of trig points that are already listed on the GCA website based on Geoscience data I believe but which nobody has logged yet. By virtue of their nature trig points caches are managed a little different but I think it's pretty cool.

[pjmpjm]

I agree, after all you did not place it, you had to go and find it, and while it may seem easy, not all unlisted Trigs are just drive by. Some do require a lot of work to find the coords, usually worked out from old maps and that can be a problem.

It seems to be common and accepted practice now that the person who first tracks down and then publicises the 'new' trig is entitled to log it as FTF.

I can see absolutely nothing wrong with this approach. The GCA 'owns' the listing and not the geocacher who published it.

Searching for, and finding, a hitherto unpublished trig is a completely different procedure from placing a traditional cache.

Having been involved in tracking down -- and then physically reaching and photographing -- a number of 'new' trigs, I can echo rogerw3's sentiments that this procedure is usually far from easy and rarely a 'drive-by' operation.

Let's hope the 'new' trigs keep coming!

[Zalgariath]

Yep same, I have no probs claiming an FTF for an unlisted Trig... however, GSAK doesnt seem to count them hahaha I nearly started claiming trigs over here in the UK but found there is in fact an entirely different site that lists them and they have been found many times. I dislike dual listing things so I didnt put them up here on GCA.

Locationless on the other hand... Lets not start that fight! hehehe