staggering news
the vawv legal description
which has just arrived by email
& is nothing but a metes & bounds description of the survey
indicates unquestionably
that the point we already know as the vawv terminal point
& which you may recall was shown in the plat on the veggie line
is situated 79point56 feet from the terminal marker we also
already know
tho my own great circle computation had it at 79point52 feet
but no matter
& moreover it flatly indicates that this point is at the
low water mark
of the potomac river
yikes
& is common to the counties & states of
loudon va & jefferson wv & washington md
yikes
i kid you not
yikes
in other words
they all believe the veggie line & the low water line are the same
thing
yikes
& this is all perfectly legal yet
yikes
so my suspicion that they might not have known what they were
doing is beginning to look justified
& the error was probably never noticed because the lands
involved are probably in the public domain & probably dont
appear on the tax rolls of any county
needless to say
i will be back on the horn with kevin in the morning
but in the meantime
what does anyone else make of this
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak"
<aletheiak@y...> wrote:
> just got off the phone with kevin again
>
> & the vawv legal description is already on its way to cream hill
>
> & he too is now actively pondering the question of exactly how
vawv
> gets down to the low water mark from the terminal point of his
survey
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak"
<aletheiak@y...>
> wrote:
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G.
McManus"
> > <mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> > > Please see my two insertions below.
> > >
> > > Lowell G. McManus
> > > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "aletheiak" <aletheiak@y...>
> > > To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 6:07 PM
> > > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: dcmdvan & mdvawv retries
> > continued
> > >
> > >
> > > > yes
> > > > kevins my man
> > > >
> > > > & tho i agree his excellent report does not directly
address
> > the
> > > > question of the tripoint
> > > > it certainly provides a new clue that could well lead to the
> > tripoint
> > > > for it reveals the existence of a legal description of the
> > boundary
> > > > previously unsuspected by me
> > > > in addition to the plat & marker description reports
already
> in
> > my
> > > > possession
> > > >
> > > > aha
> > > >
> > > > & this already sounds like
> > > > practically if not exactly
> > > > the extra tidbit you suggested i might find on file in the
> county
> > > > courthouses alongside the survey
> > > > aha
> > > >
> > > > so that already looks like some pretty sharp shooting with
> > both
> > > > barrels by you
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm glad to be of help!
> > >
> > >
> > > > & you can bet i will be on the phone with kevin in the
morning
> > > > about this missing & possibly critical document
> > > >
> > > > & yes possibly just another red herring too
> > > > i concede
> > > > but due diligence demands i track it down in any case
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > & another footnote to the dcmdvan try too
> > > >
> > > > it also just occurred to me
> > > > an additional essential bit of data i need to remember to
pull
> > off
> > > > the paper topo is the compass bearing of the dcmd&arfa
line
> > > > yikes
> > >
> > >
> > > The bearing was supposed to be north 45 degrees east.
> > BUS&SS says:
> > >
> > > The lines do not bear exactly 45° from the
> > > meridian, but the greatest variation is only 1¾'.
> >
> > right but we need to know the actual bearing along this
segment
> > of the border
> > which we can pull from the paper topo as well as anywhere
> >
> > perhaps as much as millimeters of difference are at stake
> >
> > >
> > > The footnote on that says:
> > >
> > > For data regarding surveys and boundary
> > > marks see Baker, Marcus, Nat. Geog. Mag.,
> > > vol. 6, pp. 149-165, 1894."
> > >
> > >
> > > > obviously
> > > > since we cant count on marker wm1 to give us the angle
of
> > > > approach to dcmdvan but only to indicate a point on the
> > > > dcmd&arfa line some 49 or so feet away from it
> > > > aha
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > so things keep cooking nicely on both fronts