& 2 more ahas
but re bcidmt this time
for again on closer examination of bus&ss
all 92 markers of the original 1898 survey of northernmost idmt
also prove to have been documented in their own usgs bulletin
namely number 170 dated 1900 in this case
so you might bag both bulletins on a single trip to the library
however
this one may not be so useful for bcidmt as the previously
mentioned number 466 promises to be for bcidwa
for on further perusal of this entire idmt survey line at topozone
since i found only 41 of these 92 numbered markers running
from caus to the bitterroot crest are even shown by the usgs
i think the absence of any numbered marker on the map at
bcidmt doesnt at all necessarily mean idmt marker number 1
isnt standing tall there anyway
in fact at this point it is hard for me to imagine it not being there
i just cant yet visualize whether it is a stone or iron post
& so i am now guessing you will visit at least bcidmt class a
even if bcidwa proves to be makeable only class b
still
class b is not less than class a
any more than an unmarked tripoint is less than a marked one
but is in fact usually the greater challenge & more fun
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak"
<aletheiak@y...> wrote:
> aha
> re bcidwa
> on closer eamination bus&ss reveals
> the original 1873 survey team which set the 177 idwa markers
> was forced to stop work a mile short of the canadian border
> due to winter weather & lack of food
>
> & when the line was retraced in 1908
> this book expressly states
> per usgs bulletin 466 dated 1911
> the idwa line was extended to the 49th parallel & tied to caus
> monument 195
>
> but whattt could
> tied to
> ever mean
> not to mention the 49th parallel
>
> the usgs topo
> http://tinyurl.com/29amk
> shows marker 177 the better part of a mile south of caus all
right
> but caus monument 195 is undoubtedly if very roughly 850 feet
> east of bcidwa
>
> & the published ibc coords for monument 195 confirm this
usgs
> depiction as essentially accurate
>
> so my guess is that this bulletin 466
> probably still gathering dust in the library of congress if
anywhere
> will at least state an authoritative position for bcidwa
> whether it was marked in 1908 by a durable marker or not
> as well as the exact distance from this point to caus marker
195
>
> & with that info alone you might easily pay a very respectable
> class b visit
> or you might even get close enough to scour &or dig for some
> artifact or trace of the work done in 1908
> since the area has probably not been visited or disturbed since
> except by the clear cutters
> & thus there appears to still be a chance for an almost
> inconceivable archeological visit class a
> even if there never was any deliberate demarcation
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak"
> <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
> > both of these tripoints are still believed to be virgins
> >
> >
> > & as topozone indicates
> > neither is believed to be marked
> > except perhaps as speculated by brian in message 6846
> >
> >
> > note however that bus&ss states there are only the 177 idwa
> > markers in the series shown on the topos
> > so we cant presume there is a forgotten number 178
anywhere
> > let alone at bcidwa
> >
> > on the other hand
> > the idea of a forgotten bcidmt marker in the form of a
> hypothetical
> > idmt marker number 1 is slightly more plausible
> >
> >
> > in any case i think you are right to prepare for 2 unmarked
> points
> > & you can always be pleasantly surprised if you do find
> > something at the supposed locations
> >
> >
> >
> > the abcde classifications of relative success mentioned by
> mike
> > have been generally used
> >
> > but for unmarked points
> > there is no objective standard or standard objective
> > other than the best available truth
> >
> > & because every situation is unique
> > you can only do the best you can do in each case
> > to create the level of objective accuracy you desire & believe
> > possible
> >
> >
> > & indeed
> > tho i havent unzipped or checked or grasped all your data
> > i myself am leery of introducing possibly spurious levels of
> > accuracy
> >
> > & i think brian may have been right to hold the line at integral
> > degminsecs of lat & long
> > because that is about all one can get from careful
> > measurements of the paper copies of the usgs topos
> > given their limitations
> >
> > & i think these may actually be the best available data
> > in both of the present cases
> > notwithstanding all the published ibc marker coords
> >
> > & then
> > having done that
> > your best shot may well be simply visiting the geocoords
> > indicated by the topos
> > with the help of your gps receiver
> >
> >
> >
> > however
> > since caus is marked by intervisible monuments on the
> clearcut
> > you ought to be able to improve on your gps reading
> > whatever its level of accuracy
> > by eyeballing & aligning yourself with the nearest caus
> markers
> >
> > then you will have perhaps a 100 foot length of caus on
which
> to
> > pace back & forth in each case
> > & guess the locations of your targeted tripoints
> >
> >
> > for it appears the far greater challenge will be to align with
the
> > state lines converging upon caus from the south
> > since their terminal marker pairs are almost certainly out of
> view
> > from caus
> >
> > & even if you could sight to or from them
> > you would still have the problem in both cases of projecting
the
> > final segments of the state lines from these pairs of terminal
> > markers
> > idmt 3 & 2 on the one hand
> > & idwa 176 & 177 on the other
> >
> > for the projections are only presumptively due north lines
> > whereas technically they run from marker to marker
> > & should actually run slightly askew
> > having been surveyed & marked about a century ago
> > when standards of accuracy werent so high as they are now
> >
> > of course if you could just find these last 2 markers in each
> case
> > & take gps readings of their actual latitudes & longitudes
> > & then project the state lines thru them as far as the caus
sight
> > line
> > & then find these projected points by gps readings on the
caus
> > sight line
> > no one might ever be able to improve on that methodology
> >
> > but thats a lot of work or play
> >
> >
> > in any case
> > best wishes for success
> > however you define & do it
> > as these are certainly a couple of very challenging points
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Patton
[DCP]"
> > <dpatton@c...> wrote:
> > > The short version of this email:
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > - has anyone visited BCIDWA or BCIDMT, and if so,
> > > is the visit info online?
> > > - if there have been no visits, is there info online
> > > that documents the locations of these tripoints?
> > > - for the Degree Confluence Project we have rules about
> > > what constitutes a successful visit to a confluence,
> > > and that is all outlined on our website - is there
> > > somewhere that I can refer to online for this group's
> > > 'rules' for a successful tripoint visit & documentation?
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > The long version is listed below :-)
> > >
> > >
> > > Two years ago, I asked in this group for any information
> > > about the British Columbia/Idaho/Washington(BCIDWA)
and
> > > British Columbia/Idaho/Montana(BCIDMT) tri-points:
> > >
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/message/6843
> > >
> > > I never did make it to either point - my trip was cut short:
> > >
> >
>
http://www.confluence.org/confluence.php?lat=49&lon=-117&visi
> > t=2
> > >
> > > I may be going to the area of these tripoints again fairly
soon.
> > > Brian Butler indicated in 2002 that he was going to try
visiting
> > > these tripoints in 2003:
> > >
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/message/6846
> > > but his website doesn't have any info about them:
> > > http://www.bjbsoftware.com/corners/us_canada.html
> > > and he hasn't replied to a recent email(June 30th) from me.
> > >
> > > Does anyone have any additional information?
> > >
> > > Here's what I have so far. I'm using OziExplorer as
> > > my mapping program. Unless otherwise indicated, all
> > > coordinates listed below are using NAD27 CONUS.
> > >
> > > BCIDWA
> > >
> >
>
==================================================
> > ====================
> > > A) Data sources
> > > From the University of Washington Geospatial Data
Archive
> > website:
> > > http://wagda.lib.washington.edu/data/drgs.html
> > > the Salmo Mountain 1:24,000 DRG(with full map collar):
> > >
> >
>
http://duff.geology.washington.edu/data/raster/drg/sandpoint/o48
> > 117h1.zip
> > >
> > > From the Idaho Panhandle National Forests GIS webpage:
> > > http://www.fs.fed.us/ipnf/eco/yourforest/gis/index.html
> > > the IPNF National Forest Boundary in Arc/Info export
> > format(e00):
> > >
> http://www.fs.fed.us/ipnf/eco/yourforest/gis/lands/forestbdry.zip
> > > NOTE: the e00 file was imported into OziExplorer as a
track,
> > > assuming NAD27 CONUS, and UTM Zone 11.
> > >
> > > International Boundary Commission's NAD27 Boundary
> > Segments webpage:
> > >
> >
>
http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/ibccoordnad27
> > .htm
> > > the data for section M. 49th Parallel:
> > >
> >
>
http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/coordinates/M
> > 49thp.txt
> > > NOTE: the NAD27 IBC data was converted to a format that
> > could be
> > > imported into OziExplorer as a waypoint for each boundary
> > monument.
> > > NAD27 was assumed to mean NAD27 CONUS.
> > >
> > > B) Data validation
> > > DRG map image is calibrated correctly, as UTM and lat/lon
> > > grid lines superimposed by Ozi match up with the map's
tick
> > > marks. Map image calibration done automatically by
> > OziExplorer.
> > >
> > > The locations of the Canada/USA Border Monuments 194
> and
> > 195
> > > are shown on the DRG, and the waypoints from the IBC
data
> > are
> > > shown on the map as matching the center of the map
> symbol.
> > >
> > > The track showing the IPNF Boundary matches closely with
> the
> > > Canada/USA and Washington/Idaho borders.
> > >
> > > C) BCIDWA Tripoint Coordinates
> > > Based on setting a waypoint in OziExplorer, centered on the
> > > junction of the Canada/USA border with the
> Washington/Idaho
> > > border, as shown on the DRG:
> > > N 48° 59' 57.3628" W 117° 01' 52.7731"
> > > From a June 2002 email from Brian Butler:
> > > N 48° 59' 57" W 117° 01' 53"
> > > From the "corner" trackpoint of the IPNF Boundary data:
> > > N 48° 59' 57.4096" W 117° 01' 53.1115"
> > >
> > > If there is a monument at the Cananda/USA border, then it
> > > of course would be definitive as to the tripoint location.
> > > The DRG to the south of Salmo Mountain, Helmer
Mountain:
> > >
> >
>
http://duff.geology.washington.edu/data/raster/drg/sandpoint/o48
> > 117g1.zip
> > > shows Washington/Idaho Border monuments 165 and
166,
> > with 166
> > > being to the north of 165. The Salmo Mountain DRG shows
> > monument
> > > 177, which is 949 meters due south of the border.
> > >
> > > If there is no Washington/Idaho border monument at the
> > Canada/USA
> > > border, I'm inclined to consider the first coordinate shown
> > above
> > > to be the best one at this point, because:
> > > - Brian's coordinates are only to the nearest second, and
> don't
> > > place the waypoint exactly on the border intersection
> > > - the IPNF boundary data matches the middle of the
> > Cananda/USA
> > > border line shown on the DRG, and also matches the
> middle
> > of the
> > > Washington/Idaho border line shown on the DRG south
of
> > border
> > > monument 177. However, there is a data point at
> monument
> > 177,
> > > but north of that, the next two data points(one of which is
the
> > > "corner" point)line up with the west edge of the
> > Washington/Idaho
> > > border line, not the center.
> > >
> >
>
==================================================
> > ====================
> > >
> > >
> > > BCIDMT
> > >
> >
>
==================================================
> > ====================
> > > A) Data sources
> > > From the Idaho Department of Lands Geographic
> Information
> > Systems
> > > http://gis.idl.state.id.us/GIShtm/static/GisProgram.htm
> > > via the Dynamic Data Server, the Canuck Peak 1:24,000
DRG
> > > (with full map collar):
> > > http://gis.idl.state.id.us/webGIS/drgzip/h1rc4816.zip
> > >
> > > International Boundary Commission's NAD27 Boundary
> > Segments webpage:
> > >
> >
>
http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/ibccoordnad27
> > .htm
> > > the data for section M. 49th Parallel:
> > >
> >
>
http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/coordinates/M
> > 49thp.txt
> > > NOTE: the NAD27 IBC data was converted to a format that
> > could be
> > > imported into OziExplorer as a waypoint for each boundary
> > monument.
> > > NAD27 was assumed to mean NAD27 CONUS.
> > >
> > > From the Idaho Panhandle National Forests GIS webpage:
> > > http://www.fs.fed.us/ipnf/eco/yourforest/gis/index.html
> > > the IPNF National Forest Boundary in Arc/Info export
> > format(e00):
> > >
> http://www.fs.fed.us/ipnf/eco/yourforest/gis/lands/forestbdry.zip
> > > NOTE: the e00 file was imported into OziExplorer as a
track,
> > > assuming NAD27 CONUS, and UTM Zone 11.
> > >
> > > B) Data validation
> > > The Canuck Peak(h1rc4816) DRG map image, when
> > automatically
> > > imported into OziExplorer doesn't appear to be calibrated
> > > correctly. UTM and lat/lon grid lines superimposed by Ozi
> > > match up with the map's tick marks for Longitude, but are
> > > "not quite right" for Latitude. Also, the IBC border
monument
> > > waypoints show up slightly north of the symbols on the
map,
> > > and the IPNF boundary tracklog shows up as slightly north
> > > of where it should be(e.g. in the vicinity of Canuck Peak).
> > >
> > > I used OziExplorer's 'Move Map Calibration' tool to adjust
> > > the map calibration by 6 pixels, and then all the grid lines
> > > matched the map ticks.
> > >
> > > The locations of the Canada/USA Border Monuments 220,
> 221,
> > > and 222 are shown on the DRG, and the waypoints from
the
> > > IBC data are shown on the map as matching the center of
> the
> > > map symbol.
> > >
> > > The track showing the IPNF Boundary matches the NAD27
> > 49th
> > > parallel, and also the boundary line drawn on the DRG in
> > > the lower part of the quadrangle, near Canuck Peak.
> > >
> > > C) BCIDMT Tripoint Coordinates
> > > Based on setting a waypoint in OziExplorer, centered on the
> > > junction of the Canada/USA border with the Idaho/Montana
> > > border, as shown on the DRG:
> > > N 49° 00' 03.2520" W 116° 02' 53.6531"
> > > From a June 2002 email from Brian Butler:
> > > N 49° 00' 03" W 116° 02' 53"
> > >
> > > If there is a monument at the Cananda/USA border, then it
> > > of course would be definitive as to the tripoint location.
> > > The Canuck Mountain DRG shows Idaho/Montana Border
> > monuments
> > > 2 through 12, with 2 being 1.8956 meters due south of the
> > border.
> > >
> > > If there is no Idaho/Montana border monument at the
> > Canada/USA
> > > border, I'm inclined to consider the first coordinate shown
> > above
> > > to be the best one at this point, because:
> > > - Brian's coordinates are only to the nearest second, and
> don't
> > > place the waypoint exactly on the border intersection
> > >
> >
>
==================================================
> > ====================
> > >
> > > --
> > > Dave Patton
> > > Canadian Coordinator, Degree Confluence Project
> > > http://www.confluence.org/
> > > My website: http://members.shaw.ca/davepatton/