Subject: Re: Adjustment of 1912<br/>
Date: Jul 17, 2003 @ 03:04<br/>
Author: acroorca2002 (&quot;acroorca2002&quot; &lt;orc@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="10997.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="10999.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic10997.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="10997.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="10999.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-634706241">--- In <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a>, &quot;bjbutlerus&quot; <br/>
&lt;bjbutler@b...&gt; wrote:<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; The &quot;adjustment of 1912&quot; appears to be a vertical datum <br/>
 </span></blockquote>correction<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; that affected benchmarks all over the country, not just in the <br/>
 </span></blockquote>greater<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; MN-ND-SD area, so I think there is nothing sacred about that <br/>
 </span></blockquote>year in<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; terms of boundary changes or the DAMN line.<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; BJB<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>ok right<br/>
this is a misidentification of what i meant<br/>
which as i say has been eluding rediscovery<br/>
<br/>
perhaps more to the point are the similarly elusive references to<br/>
many rural wetlands drained in 1912 to provide more crop land <br/>
such as occurs at the end of<br/>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://midwest.fws.gov/ecosys/hilights.htm">http://midwest.fws.gov/ecosys/hilights.htm</a><br/>
<br/>
but again for the reasons mentioned<br/>
i myself have pretty much given up on 1912 <br/>
in favor of the period between 1869 & 1891<br/>
<br/>
the historic records at<br/>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.rrbdin.org/floodtables.htm">http://www.rrbdin.org/floodtables.htm</a><br/>
indicate devastating floods in 1871 1873 1882 & 1883<br/>
<br/>
& i realize you dont believe natural avulsions are even possible <br/>
on this river<br/>
so i wont argue with you <br/>
except to reiterate my perhaps naive belief that if a flood on any <br/>
stream is powerful enough for the entire flood plain to get <br/>
scoured then the channel might resettle in a new location<br/>
<br/>
& i do have to mention the problematic flip side of this coin<br/>
which is that i find it hard to imagine what 19th century manmade <br/>
avulsions might have looked like<br/>
<br/>
i mean what could a very few locals & their oxen or horses have <br/>
done to reconstruct a scene like this<br/>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.oldprintshop.com/images/large/28107.jpg">http://www.oldprintshop.com/images/large/28107.jpg</a><br/>
<br/>
<br/>
also your puzzled observation about the old & new channels on <br/>
your usace map seeming to be in the reversed positions <br/>
could be resolved by a return of the stream to its old bed <br/>
in a subsequent avulsion <br/>
<br/>
<br/>
but anyway with far more questions now than we can answer <br/>
with any confidence<br/>
we may well have reached an impasse in our speculations<br/>
which will only be resolved by harder data than we now have</div>