Please see my two insertions below.
Lowell G. McManus
Leesville, Louisiana, USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>
To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:18 AM
Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: mathews & nelson arrive with several surprises
> thanx
>
> & this only keeps getting more delicious
>
> for
> tho it is true that the vawv convergent at mdvawv was originally
> a drainage divide
> or to be more exact
> a ridge line
> & specifically the summit line of the blue ridge
> still
> we also know that this natural border was modified circa 1998
> into a series of geodetic zigzags that actually leapfrog along the
> true ridge line
> while actually only approximating & rationalizing it
I remember that you had consulted with one of the surveyors involved in this
undertaking and obtained some numbers. You might contact him again to ask why
the survey terminated at the high-water mark. It might be because insufficient
legal delimitation existed between that point and the low-water mark. I believe
that the statutory wording was "the watershed line of the top of the ridge of
the Blue Ridge Mountains." Surveyors are typically disinclined to go beyond
where words send them. Perhaps it was judged as impossible to apply this
statutory delimitation below the high-water mark.
More below...
> so in order to administer the exact tripointing stitch you propose
> we would first have to insert a pretripointing stitch
> between the extant vawv terminus on the rationalized ridge line
> & some corresponding but also unknown & unknowable point
> on the true ridge line
>
> in other words
> that tiny & ridiculous loose end is an actual show stopper
> for now
> & perhaps forever
>
>
> so rather i think the question has to be
> how to get down from the actual legal geodetic vawv terminal
> point at high water line to the actual legal mdva&mdwv at low
> water mark
>
>
> & how we answer this how will determine the point where the
> vawv terminal stitch reaches
> & thus itself effectively determines
> the tripoint
>
> yikes
>
>
>
> the leading choices appear to all be straight lines
> 1
> prolonging & extending the extant terminal segment of vawv in
> the spirit of sheer momentum until it reaches the low water mark
> 2
> proceeding from the extant vawv terminal point in a spirit of
> mediation at right angles to the river as far as the low water mark
> & 3
> proceeding from the extant vawv terminal point in a spirit of best
> available literalness directly toward the ridge line visible above
> the opposite bank
> but again of course just as far as the low water mark
>
> this last one is an accommodation of your basic idea to the
> reality on the ground there
Number 2 is less than perfect for lack of a knowing what length of irregular
river should be taken as the basis for measurement of "right angles to the
river." Also, the river bank and the river current run at quite different
angles where the VAWV line strikes them. Which would we use?
End of insertions.
> for another difficulty is that there is no obvious trace of the ridge
> line anywhere within the river defile
>
> a few taller boulders among all the rubble perhaps
> but really just a bunch of random dots to wishfully connect
>
>
> but in any case there we have at least 3 different possible
> stitches to choose from
> each producing a different tripoint position
>
> i mean
> to choose from once we decide on how to precisely determine
> this chimerical beast called
> low water mark
> within such a broad expanse of basically flat river bed
>
>
> what fun
>
>
> but what does anyone think so far
>
>
> this baby is going to be entirely up to us