Mike D.,
Okay, I'll consider myself severely chastised, but I was only trying to help
you.
In my initial pronouncement on the Borden-Dawson-Howard-Martin quadripoint, I
clearly cited the topo and the aerial photo. I did not foresee that anyone
might think that I was claiming independent personal knowledge of the lack of a
monument. If you think you can find something in the middle of a plowed field,
by all means go look. You'll have fun in the process, and that's why you do
this.
As I have explained, my assertion that Atwood must have surveyed from north to
south was based on the geometric impossibility of doing from south to north what
the Arizona Revised Statutes say that he did. I did suggest that you consult
the archives (which you might have done anyway). When you did so, you proved
that Atwood didn't do nearly what the statutes say he did, and that he did it in
the opposite direction. Who knew that the laws of Arizona could be so wrong?
Anything that any of us writes is based on the best evidence available to us at
the time, and it is subject to subsequent discovery of more perfect truth. As a
lover of truth, I am never bothered by being corrected. Nevertheless, I will
endeavor to more carefully explain why I believe what I believe to be true--even
if I am trying to get a reply back to you while you're still at the library.
I have trimmed my replies, not to cover any tracks, but because several members
have asked posters to do so. It's all there in the archives anyway. If I
really wanted to hide a past post, I could delete it from the archives. I have
not done so.
In an effort to further assist you, later this evening I will post (citing my
source) a list of Texas tertiary quadripoints that are believed to be
monumented.
Lowell G. McManus
Leesville, Louisiana, USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>
To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 5:00 PM
Subject: [BoundaryPoint] arrowhead az Re: no mxus for xmus after all but its ajo
ho
>
>
> inserts hurriedly
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus"
> <mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> > Mike,
> >
> > I'm basing my statement on the lack of a monument at the
> quadripoint in question on: (1) no monument indicated on USGS topo;
>
> as you know
> this in itself is neither here nor there
>
> >and (2) the 1991 aerial photo that shows it located in a partially
> harvested field of what looks like it might be wheat. If the
> tractors, combines, or whatever were purposely avoiding a "dire
> penalty" sign, I think that we could see some irregularity in the
> field.
>
> ok but you must understand it is still a presumption by you then
>
> so please dont offer it as a fact yet
> as you have done in 16342
> & have reiterated albeit less confidently in 16349 & again now
> even as you progressively cover your tracks by cutting the texts
>
> you just did the same thing with the atwood initial monument last week
> & it is silly to expect others to have to keep sifting your
> presumptions from your facts
>
> & the players in the field will just stop trusting you quite so much
> if they have to keep pulling all your stuff apart like this
>
> > I see no reason why there might be any federal marker at the site.
> It's not a USC&GS vertical control benchmark.
>
> ok
> me too
> i see no reason
> but thats not the same as being sure
>
> >This is Texas that we're talking about, so the land was never part
> of the federal public domain nor of the federal public land survey.
> Original patenting of land titles to private owners, as well as the
> county boundary surveys, was under the purview of the General Land
> Office of Texas, and I have pointed you to their files.
> >
> > Unfortunately, I am unable to assist with the actual content of the
> county boundary files due to my extremely slow dial-up connection.
> (I'm far into the country, and my phone line is relayed, modulated,
> multiplexed, or whatever to such an extent that my top speed is about
> 26 K.) Downloading such large files would be virtually impossible.
> Getting topos is hard enough. (I do plan to get satellite broadband
> as soon as the new WildBlue service rolls out, now expected in second
> quarter, 2005.)
>
> ok
> really running out of time now
> but there is more
> so please expect more comments
>
> > I can give you an example of the contents of the Texas GLO files
> found in the indexing. The 1908 plat of the Borden-Howard boundary
> is at https://scandocs.glo.state.tx.us/arcmaps/pdfs/1694.pdf . The
> scanned original is on a rolled piece of tracing cloth, 23.7 by 125.7
> inches, at a scale of 500 varas per inch, drawn by the two county
> surveyors. I estimate that it would take me 7.5 hours to download
> it! Most public libraries have the broadest of broadband, so you
> might be able to get it.
> >
> > The area in question is an odd region of Texas in which the state
> GLO's land survey is a rectangular grid rotated about 15 degrees
> counterclockwise from the cardinal points. The road grid follows the
> survey grid. The county boundaries, on the other hand, were
> specified by the legislature as north-south and east-west lines.
> Nothing matches! Certainly the county boundaries were marked somehow
> by their surveyors (perhaps on cadastral boundaries), else the
> surveys would have had no practical purpose. Everybody already knew
> that the counties were neat 30-mile rectangles.
> >
> > Remember that you scoured northern Virginia in vain for a marked
> tertiary tripoint. That, too, is an area where county and cadastral
> boundaries don't typically coincide.
> >
> > You might look for other Texas tertiary quadripoints that are shown
> as monumented on USGS topos. I will try to assist as well. I would
> expect that some of them are monumented/marked, especially in the
> regions where the boundaries do conform to the state's survey grid.
> I'll keep you informed.
> >
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> >
> >
> >
> > ---- Original Message -----
> > From: aletheia kallos
> > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2004 2:54 PM
> > Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] arrowhead az Re: no mxus for xmus
> after all but its ajo ho
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> > Mike D. wrote:
> >
> > > but does unmonumented necessarily mean unmarked
> > >
> > > & how then do they mark or even know the county lines there
> anyway
> > > let alone the corners
> > >
> > > & please let me know if you find any better hope for any texas
> > > megapoint visit to be made class a
> > >
> > > that is
> > > one that is definitely marked
> >
> > I was using "unmonumented" to mean "unmarked." It would be
> difficult for any
> > physical mark to survive in a plowed farm field.
> >
> > aha then first you precluded but now you merely doubt that such
> a hypothetical marker could also survive by virue of being protected
> say by one of those ubiquitous uscgs signposts in its vicinity which
> warn
> >
> > do not disturb nearby boundary marker under dire penalty etc etc
> >
> > &or that such a marker would not also have been designed to
> withstand such an otherwise obvious demise as you describe
> >
> > & therefore that it couldnt exist
> >
> > or do i misread you in this
> >
> >
> >
> > & being so far unable to follow all your protocols here in
> surprise tho i will keep trying i cant yet see what you are talking
> about in regard to plats surveys notes etc
> >
> > but since you can access them maybe you could describe how
> these 4 county boundary descriptions describe this megapoint
> >
> > & maybe you could find some mention in any of the 256 of these
> county boundary descriptions of any boundary markers &or multipoint
> markers of any kind
> >
> > for otherwise you appear to be predicting a complete washout of
> texas tertiary markers not only for the megapoints but for everything
> >
> > & moreover you seem to be indicating that these boundaries were
> surveyed but never durably marked
> >
> > yikes
> >
> > but can that be what you mean
> >
> > or its consequences
> >
> > for perhaps i am merely racing too far ahead while actually
> lagging too far behind you
> >
> > There might be signage on the
> > nearby highway. There seems to be a change of pavement color
> at about the right
> > place to the north in the aerial photo.
> >
> > The General Land Office of the State of Texas has most of
> its "County Boundary
> > Files" (usually including original plats and field notes) on-
> line in PDF format.
> > Go to
> http://wwwdb.glo.state.tx.us/central/arcmaps/ArcMapsLookup.cfm ,
> select
> > the name of the county in the upper drop-down box,
> select "County Boundary" in
> > the lower scroll box, ignore all of the parameters in between,
> then click the
> > "Search" button. You'll get an index to all boundary files for
> that county. In
> > that index, you can click "More Details..." on each item for
> dates, surveyor's
> > names, etc. The drawback is that these are huge files suitable
> for broadband
> > only.
> >
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>