--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Smaardijk"
<smaardijk@y...> wrote:
> According to the text on Eef's page (the protocol of 1841), there
> were two parcels of land (nos. 119 and 120 of section F, "De
Reth"),
> that were reported as being divided between Belgium and the
> Netherlands:
>
> "Van het perceel no. 119 groot 1.98.00 behoort
> aan de gemeente Baarle-Nassau 1.24.60. aan de gemeente
Baarle-Hertog
> 0.73.40.
>
> Van het perceel no. 120 groot 1.53.90 behoort
> aan de gemeente Baarle-Nassau 1.01.90. aan de gemeente
Baarle-Hertog
> 0.52.00."
>
> Those two parcels can be seen on the original cadastral map
on
> http://www.dewoonomgeving.nl/ . Choose "Zoek -> Kaart ->
Gemeente";
> type in "Baarle-Nassau" in the box below, click on "zoeken",
then
> choose from the pull-down menu
thanx very much peter
& i got this far all right
but then couldnt find the pulldown menu
maybe it is just that my browser is too old tho
but can you or anyone persevere here where i cant quite do so
to read these exact coords off out loud now for all posterity
since we are at last so close to actually bagging them
thanx again
end insert
"NoordBrabant - Baarle-Nassau - F - De
> Reth - 1", and click on "Toon Minuutplan". You can zoom in
twice.
> Baarle-Hertog territory is coloured green.
>
> The cadastre would have the exact co-ordinates, I think.
>
> Peter
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak"
<aletheiak@y...>
> wrote:
> > aha
> > ok thanks
> > just as i suspected
> >
> > & since the marker isnt official
> > then how do we know if it actually marks the quadripoint
> > or if it actually mismarks it
> >
> > the answer to this evidently is
> > we dont know
> >
> >
> > so then
> > how might we learn exactly where the quadripoint does fall
> >
> > & the answer to this is
> > either
> > by sighting thru 2 pairs of intervisible monuments
> > if indeed the border cross is marked by such
> > which however has never been reported
> >
> > or else
> > if such a methodology does not in fact obtain there
> > then only by using the geocoords given in the cadastral
records
> > & searching for them with a high powered gps receiver
> >
> >
> > but clearly & happily
> > we do still very much appear to have somewhere to go there
> >
> >
> > & just for the record
> > can anyone actually provide the legal geocoords of the
quadpoint
> > or of the sighting markers if any
> > so at least we will know exactly where we do need to go
> >
> >
> > another line of questions
> > tho a far less interesting & pressing one
> > is
> > who did install the pipe
> > & what did they use for accuracy
> > or were they just guessing
> >
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Brendan Whyte
> > <bwhyte@u...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > The pipe has no official status. It simply tells the farmers
> > where the
> > > point is when they plant and harvest their fields (the field
> > around the
> > > pipe usually grows corn). When I was there (Oct 2000), one
> > quarter of the
> > > field had been harvested, using the pipe as a marker.
> > >
> > > Remember that there are no fences along the international
> > boundary, but
> > > rather the boundary here runs across a field, forming an x.
The
> > pipe simply
> > > marks the middle of the x.
> > >
> > > But it is not an officially measured border monument,
although
> > it may have
> > > been placed since the 1994 delimitation of the boundaries
of
> > the enclaves.
> > >
> > > Brendan