but it keeps getting better
yesterday as i was heading here to radium springs by a new route
slipping north from las cruces a good mile west of the rio
i chanced on a peculiar roadside historical plaque mounted on an equally
strange masonry pedestal
& it was so weird & insignificant looking that i almost overlooked it
but since i knew this was a hot area
i turned back to read what it said
just in case
& sure enough it said
on 21 april 1851 members of the joint boundary commission of the usa &
mexico assembled here & declared this point to mark the southern boundary of
new mexico in accordance with the provisions of the treaty of guadalupe
hidalgo
erected as a memorial to the pioneer surveyors of 2 nations by the nm assn of
surveyors & mappers feb 1988
so this must be the location of the ghost rock
as well as a confirmation it no longer exists
but also a confirmation that i have indeed made my fools errand point
however unintentionally & however far from where i expected to find it
topozone gives the latitude as 32d21m58s
for the position as centered here
http://topozone.com/map.asp?z=13&n=3582548&e=325282&u=6&datum=nad
83
or in other words 2 seconds off the intended 32d22m00s line
but the error could as easily be a topozone quirk as a survey lapse
anyway nice to see it is so close to perfect
the existence of this plaque may also explain why someone
perhaps the mentioned nmas&m responsible for erecting it
tried to obliterate the apparently contradictory historical marker that was found
& reported earlier a couple miles away & on the wrong side of the river
& which led to this whole wild rock chase of mine & surprise ending
still better
when i got to the hot springs
or rather in the course of our usual nights drinking & bathing here
my hosts jeff & david finally offered to drive my stash past the guard post for
me in their pickup truck
the obvious solution
since they look like locals & wont ring all the alarm bells my profile & record will
so now we are planning to do just this
a little later in the afternoon today in fact
& this should probably change all my other plans in favor of taking advantage of
this opportunity of making good my escape
& with luck my next report will be not from las cruces or this crazy old computer
of jeffs here in radium springs nor even from el paso with the ibwc research
but from somewhere entirely outside this clave & back in the metropole of the
usa
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, barbaria_longa@h... wrote:
> notice
> useless enjoyment following
>
>
> a third & best & perhaps final try for the ghost of the mxus abortion
> rock this afternoon has indeed also turned up nothing
> tho i combed the blufftop at the exact degminsec quite carefully
> just in case the 1851 survey was as good as topozone
> & tho i even scoured the entire degmin up & down the river
> in case the survey was only that accurate
>
> yet i realized too that it may not have been nearly so fine
> & that my try however careful is therefore both speculative &
> incomplete
> tho frankly
> i knew from the start i was sending myself on a fools errand anyway
>
> there were several rushes of near discovery tho
> when i thought i saw something i didnt
>
> & it was of course another wonderful outing on another beautiful day
> imagining 3 commissioners imagining they were forging a new mxus
> in a setting somewhat like this btw
> http://www.texasbeyondhistory.net/firecracker/images/fire-92-sm.jpg
> http://www.totacc.com/user/strokesupport/37.gif
>
> best i can do without a camera or a rock to show anyway
>
> & indeed it was particularly lovely to spend some hours on the rio
> without any sign or trace or trappings of mxus at all
>
> like it might have been the coasts of nebraska or oregon or something
> but just with the backdrop of needle sharp mountains added
>
> but so anyway
> was that productive
>
> yes definitely as far as i am concerned
>
> i may even try it again
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, orc@o... wrote:
> > first
> > the full excerpt from the bible p28
> > under
> > first mexican cession
> > as follows
> >
> > the most difficult question that came before the 1849 mxus
> commission
> > for decision concerned the location & extent of the south boundary
> of
> > new mexico
> >
> > here unfortunately the disturnell map left room for broad
> differences
> > of opinion
> >
> > the town called paso
> > now named juarez
> > was located on the map more than half a degree too far north &
> nearly
> > 2 degrees too far east
> >
> > in the absence of the chief surveyor for the usa
> > the 3 other members of the commission agreed to accept the position
> > of the south boundary of new mexico as shown by the projection
> lines
> > on the map
> > namely lat 32d22m north
> > & to run a line in that latitude 3 degrees west from the rio grande
> &
> > thence north until a branch of the gila river was intersected
> >
> > in accordance with this decision
> > a durable monument was erected on the bank of the rio grande
> > in nlat 32d22m
> > & the running of the line westward was begun
> > see fig47
> >
> > after a degree & a half had been run
> > the chief surveyor for the usa arrived
> > & learned what had been done
> > & made a vigorous protest against this interpretation of the map
> >
> > this protest caused the sudden stoppage of the work of running the
> > line
> > & the repudiation of the agreement by the usgovt
> >
> > the usa claimed the boundary should be located with reference to
> the
> > town of paso
> > the only definite point for it named in the treaty
> >
> > under this claim
> > according to later observations
> > the south boundary of new mexico would be placed at about nlat
> 31d52m
> > & it would extend west to wlong 109d30m
> >
> > negotiations followed but no agreement had been reached before 1853
> > when the gadsden purchase made further discussion unnecessary
> >
> > end of quote
> >
> >
> > & secondly
> > the deciphered text of the ghost historical marker near dona ana nm
> > as follows
> >
> > bartlett garcia conde initial survey point
> >
> > on 24 april 1851 john russell bartlett for the usa & pedro garcia
> > conde for the republic of mexico erected near here a monument
> > designating 32d 22m nlat on the rio grande as the initial point for
> > the official survey of usmx
> >
> > after the gadsden purchase the boundary was moved south
> >
> > end of text
> >
> >
> > & finally the report that my second & more focussed try to find
> this
> > durable but bogus & probably no longer existent marker yesterday
> > afternoon was again class e
> > but i will try again one last time today with the best available
> map
> > in hand
> > because it seems to me that the slight technical inaccuracy or
> > omission in the text of the historical marker was not enough to
> > warrant someone taking so much trouble to destroy it
> >
> > there probably had to be a better reason
> >
> > & the only other reason i can think of is that the local property
> > owner may have wanted to discourage visitors
> >
> > & that is why i have decided not to suspend the try yet
> > but to try even harder one last time
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "m06079"
> <barbaria_longa@h...>
> > wrote:
> > > those of you who have been following the progress of mxus between
> > > 1848 & 1853 with us this past week may have noticed the passage
> on
> > > p28 in the bible
> > > under the heading of
> > > first mexican session
> > > which tells of an abortive first survey of the south boundary of
> > new
> > > mexico westward from the rio grande along latitude 32d22m
> > >
> > > this line is shown in fig 47 on p162 too
> > >
> > >
> > > well
> > > along my route from the university to the hot springs each night
> > > after reading & rereading this & related passages
> > > i had been passing an almost completely defaced new mexico
> > historical
> > > marker near the village of dona ana
> > >
> > > & since new mexico historical markers
> > > & defaced ones in particular
> > > are almost always worth a look
> > > i finally stopped on saturday to try to decipher this one
> > > & lo & behold
> > > it says something about the initial point of this very boundary
> > > survey being near that very place
> > > etc etc
> > >
> > > & tho it is unclear why someone so carefully obliterated the
> entire
> > > text of the historical marker almost beyond decipherment
> > > it may have been out of a concern for historical authenticity
> > > since the survey had after all been invalidated almost as soon as
> > it
> > > was begun in 1851
> > > & its correction finally obviated in 1853 by the gadsden purchase
> > >
> > > but anyway i scoured the right bank of the rio for about a mile
> > near
> > > there
> > > hoping against hope that i might find the actual relic
> > > since i realize erroneous rocks are routinely pulled rather than
> > > allowed to stand & cause further confusion
> > >
> > > & i will look again this afternoon even more carefully
> > > exactly where the topo shows this latitude crossing the river
> > > with a final careful beating of the bushes
> > > just in case the surveyors got that part exactly right
> > > & just in case the rock wasnt pulled after all
> > >
> > > but basically i think this report of a ghost memorial to a ghost
> > rock
> > > from an abortive 1851 mxus survey is already as complete as it
> will
> > > ever be