funny how we landed a minute apart
& let me just insert these comments this time as it is getting late
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Hugh Wallis" <hugh@o...> wrote:
>
> I would like to determine, from copies of treaties, legislation or whatever,
> the exact line of the ONQC border. I had no success in find this online
> earlier today. Not sure if it would be in Federal or Provincial archives.
> The border was probably set at Confederation (July 1st, 1867) if not before
> that (possibly even as far back as being defined as the border between Upper
> and Lower Canada) - this will be interesting research.
great
me too
& a good place to begin was the canadian border bible
aka the boundaries of the canadian confederation
by norman l nicholson 1979
which explains that all canadian waters both salty & sweet were still federal crown territory
as of that late date
so the allocation to the provinces in the saint lawrence is evidently quite recent
1980s or 1990s i believe i later learned
& i think federal government would be the more propitious direction to search in
> When I get time I will check the US and Canadian topos for consistency as
> regards their depiction of the CAUS border but I think they are bang on in
> agreement with each other.
not so
this is what i have been saying
canada shows an interpolated first segment & turnpoint just southwest of saint regis that
the usa doesnt show & the original 1814 treaty doesnt mention
it could be the result of a later treaty we dont yet know about because the ibs gives coords
for this crazy mon andrew ellicott that could mean something
but i am almost perfectly sure this monument cant be where they say it is
& that their data are at least somewhat jumbled if not worse
& that could have been where canada went wrong too
if she did
& if there has not in fact been any change in the sequence since 1814
as the usa still seems to believe
This will be easy to check in my mapping software
> by marking the turn points on one map and seeing if they coincide with those
> on the other map when it is loaded into the software.
great & i hope you will so we can check these ibs coords against both maps
& also check our distance measurements & computations
but you can also see the glaring difference i am talking about immediately with your naked
eye if you will just look first where i just said to the left of st regis on both your recent
map attachments
> _____
>
> From: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of aletheiak
> Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 6:53 PM
> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [BoundaryPoint] nyonqc location was Re: special congrats may be in
> order for czdepl improvement
>
>
> & at the same time
> lets carry another hypothesis
> which is that canada is right naturally enough about nyonqc in principle
> but that the usa is right about caus because the only treaty text we know of
> says so
> & thus that the canadian mappers ate pied ibs coords not wisely but too well
>
> which would explain everything comfortably
>
> as well as deliver us a better method for our madness
>
> & thus for a second & putatively closer nyonqc 10foot window try
>
>
>
> which forces our next play
>
> which is to ask the ibs for backup
>
> & no problem since they do that routinely
>
>
>
>
> or
> would you rather we just suspend the first try based on the canadian version
> of caus
> & cut directly to this hybrid try
> based on
> treaty text
> plus
> usgs mapping
> plus
> canadian nyonqc
> albeit necessarily a little fudged from your map in that event
>
> while perhaps also expecting that what we are actually guessing at here is
> either some
> statutory geoposition or a statutory midseaway specification we will soon
> discover anyway
>
> which it might then become our necessity & honor to figure out how to
> geolocate for the
> first time in history
>
>
> but in the meantime i am going to make the necessary new measurements &
> calculations
> if i can for this second hypothetical position
>
> so please stand by
> & or help frame the query to the ibs
> but also please chime in as much & as soon as possible
> with any corroborations objections news etc
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, aletheia kallos <aletheiak@y...>
> wrote:
> >
> > yikes haha ok but this is the same map i began from in
> > the middle of
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint/message/18922
> > which has long since been truncated from the bottom of
> > the present thread
> > hahaha
> > so at least we are now fully on all the same pages
> >
> > & i dont think it really is so hard to tell exactly
> > what this map is saying
> > for tho it too is truncated
> > it clearly indicates & says by its placement of words
> > & border lines
> > as you can see if you view the full sheet here
> > http://topozone.com/map.asp?
> z=18&n=4983660&e=523103&s=100&size=l&u=6&datum=nad83&layer=DRG25
> > that nyonqc equals turnpoint 1
> >
> > but tho it does clearly say that
> > nevertheless
> > your presumably more authoritative canadian topo gives
> > us good reason to believe it is clearly mistaken in
> > doing so
> > just as are the many other maps i or we have seen that
> > also show it that way
> > for example
> > http://www.racquetteriver.org/akwesasnemap.htm
> >
> > moreover if you switch to the still more severely
> > truncated 100k & 250k scale topozone versions
> > there is still enough river showing there to see that
> > they repeat the mistakes of the 25k version
> > rather than correcting anything in the direction of
> > your again more presumably correct canadian topo
> > at least regarding the course of caus westward into
> > the river from saint regis
> > but also regarding the nyoncq position
> > as you can also see on a nontruncated 100k version
> > here
> > http://terraserver.microsoft.com/image.aspx?
> t=2&s=14&x=164&y=1556&z=18&w=1&qs=%7chogansburg%7cnew+york%7c
> >
> > so i think it is clear what the usgs is saying but
> > almost equally clear that what it is saying is wrong
> >
> > or else we are wrong to be so trustful of official
> > canada
> > but lets not think so yet until we have played this
> > out anyway
> >
> >
> > & let me also answer you here before proceeding with
> > the analysis that
> > as you can also gather more clearly from the first
> > link above
> > the reason the nydpw is named at the top of that topo
> > & in just that funny place of honor too
> > is that it is being credited there right alongside the
> > dept of the interior & usgs as a collaborator or
> > contributor of data in that topo sheet
> >
> >
> > but
> > except for 1 or 2 inconvenient facts i am coming to
> > i think the analysis & try might proceed full steam
> > ahead already based on your 259 meter measurement on
> > the canadian topo from turnpoint 1 to nyonqc
> > because
> > we apparently have the official ibs coords of the
> > turnpoints shown on the canadian topo to either side
> > of nyonqc
> > & which lend all the more credence to its testimony
> >
> > as mentioned here
> > http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/coordinates/SECT-K-83.txt
> > turnpoint 1 is
> > nad83 nlat45d00m22s6 x wlong74d40m13s9
> > & apparently the next point to the southeast on the
> > other side of nyonqc is
> > nad83 nlat44d59m56s1 x wlong74d39m47s0
> >
> > but here is the first really inconvenient fact
> > for it appears that the ibs name for this next
> > turnpoint is
> > mon andrew ellicott
> >
> > unless that simply means the lost ellicott rock is now
> > out in the river
> >
> > but then it is still most puzzling to learn that thats
> > where it might be
> >
> > however
> > i am willing to assume until we can check these facts
> > or find better data altogether
> > that
> > either
> > the lost ellicott rock is indeed out in the river now
> > or
> > much more likely
> > the labels but not the geocoords of the first 2 points
> > on the list have somehow gotten reversed
> > perhaps just owing to some inadvertent slipup
> > or even more likely because some well meaning soul
> > figured the word & point of origin must come at the
> > beginning of the series
> > & couldnt leave it alone but had to correct it into
> > its present actually now incorrect form
> >
> > or else
> > these ibs data are even more pied than that
> > & the whole try based on them will go poof as soon as
> > we realize how wrong they are
> >
> >
> > & i am willing to assume all this because i met an old
> > chief right there next to monument 774 in saint regis
> > who assured me the lost ellicott rock was indeed also
> > right there next to us under all the veggies on the
> > riverbank
> > as he & his naturally silent & pushy dog helped us off
> > his land we were caught tresspassing on
> >
> > & this btw is the monument referred to in bus&ss p13
> > under treaty of ghent 1814
> > where in describing the beginning of the saint
> > lawrence sector of caus it says
> > in digest
> > beginning at a stone monument erected by andrew
> > ellicott in 1817 on the south bank or shore of the
> > river now called saint lawrence which marks the point
> > where the 45th parallel strikes it
> > & thence running north 35d45m west into the river on a
> > line at right angles with the southern shore to a
> > point 100 yards south of the opposite island called
> > cornwell
> > thence turning westerly
> > etc etc
> >
> > which raises the mentioned second inconvenient fact
> >
> > for this is more or less how the american maps do show
> > it
> > yikes
> > & not at all how your canadian topo shows it
> > yikes
> > except
> > the american angle is more like n45w than the
> > specified 35ish
> > oops
> > whereas the angle on the canadian topo
> > once it finally does turn northwest
> > is indeed in the right n35w ballpark
> > yikes & oops
> >
> > so in order to sidestep all that & continue to believe
> > your canadian map might still be right
> > which i would still like to do even if only to
> > complete the try
> > i have to hypothesize that an extra turn point was
> > added here between 1814 & the present
> > between the ellicott rock & turnpoint 1
> > called now perhaps turnpoint 0 & or origin by the ibs
> > as well as that the bus&ss text must also have
> > committed one of its many typos in this supposedly
> > 35d45m northwest bearing
> >
> > both of which i also gladly do
> > making the whole try more & more provisional
> > & less & less probable
> > yet still sustainable
> >
> >
> > & since you could measure the 259 meters all right
> > i figure you can also easily measure the rest of the
> > caus leg shown there which it is part of
> >
> > & then using
> > & if possible also confirming by measurement
> > the above ibs coords for the 2 caus turnpoints to
> > either side of the nyonqc position on your topo
> > it would then take just some computation from there
> > to get us into the most probably correct 10 foot
> > window for nyoncq as shown there
> >
> >
> > so let me just pause here to see if you get & agree
> > with this much
> > & to see if you can advance the measurements & do the
> > computations to get us there directly
> > or if there are some other considerations i may have
> > missed
> >
> > --- Hugh Wallis <hugh@o...> wrote:
> >
> > > OK - found a collared version which extends north a
> > > bit - see attached.
> > >
> > > It is hard to tell exactly what this map is saying
> > > since there does appear
> > > to be a small line extending towards Canada at the
> > > apex of the border in the
> > > river and no sign of the ONQC border meeting the
> > > international border
> > > further southeast (incidentally plotting this on the
> > > Canadian map shows a
> > > distance difference of 259m). But then why would the
> > > State of New York
> > > Department of Public Works care about the exact
> > > location of the ONQC border?
> > > Clearly we need to find the answer by reference to
> > > Ontario and Québec
> > > sources since it is all about that provincial
> > > border's alignment and the USA
> > > has no (official) interest in this.
> > >
> > >
> > > _____
> > >
> > > From: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > [mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com]
> > > On Behalf Of Hugh Wallis
> > > Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 10:31 AM
> > > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: RE: [BoundaryPoint] nyonqc location was Re:
> > > special congrats may be
> > > in order for czdepl improvement
> > >
> > >
> > > OOPS - forgot the attachment
> > >
> > > Unfortunately I have been unable to obtain the
> > > relevant USGS quad from
> > > http://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov since o44074h6 is
> > > cut off at 45 deg N (see
> > > attached) which is just south of this point and
> > > there is no map available
> > > from that source immediately north of that. If
> > > anyone knows where I could
> > > obtain the missing bit I would be grateful. I will
> > > continue to search
> > > meanwhile.
> > >
> > >
> > > _____
> > >
> > > From: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > [mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com]
> > > On Behalf Of aletheia kallos
> > > Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 9:45 AM
> > > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: RE: [BoundaryPoint] nyonqc location was Re:
> > > special congrats may be
> > > in order for czdepl improvement
> > >
> > >
> > > agreed that skepticism is always a good idea
> > > & i can add from some experience
> > > especially so for this nyonqc baby
> > >
> > > & for indian & third world mapping in general of
> > > course too
> > >
> > > so please dont put too fine a point on my previous
> > > best guess of
> > > a couple hundred meters toward the right bank etc
> > >
> > > &
> > > thanx to this your still more reliable looking but
> > > essentially identical map
> > > which goes at least partway to the more
> > > authoritative
> > > data i had been looking for
> > > it seems pretty likely now from their matching
> > > depictions of the onqc turnpoints & particularly
> > > their
> > > matching slight overextension of onqc beyond nyonqc
> > > into the usa
> > > that my maps were at least partly copied or
> > > generated
> > > from yours
> > > or rather lets say from the same master as yours by
> > > &
> > > large
> > >
> > > but i am still following your advice & being
> > > skeptical
> > > & just as skeptical of yours as of mine
> > > because of the glaringly mistaken caus jog yours
> > > takes
> > > southwest from marker 774
> > > rather than cutting this directly nw from the
> > > 45degree
> > > sector terminal & transition point
> > > aka the lost ellicott rock
> > > to turnpoint 1 properly so called
> > > as we know it should from the ibc coords for the
> > > markers & turnpoints
> > > & downtown personal experience
> > >
> > >
> > > which btw makes it totally impossible to take
> > > advantage of the improvement your official canadian
> > > mapping represents for purposes of refining this
> > > guess
> > >
> > > up to say 300 meters or 100 yards
> > > hahahahaha
> > > which nevertheless i now emphatically do anyway
> > > hahahaha
> > > after having combined & crunched all the data we
> > > have
> > > so far developed
> > > but relying especially & most emphatically in this
> > > case on indian mapping
> > > hahahaha
> > > rather than the luxuries of either canadian first
> > > world or american second world mapping
> > > hahahhahahaha
> > > hahahahahahaha
> > > ahhhhhhh
> > >
> > > & in fact i would even like to wheedle that up to
> > > roughly 302 meters now
> > > back toward the ellicott rock
> > > from the 10 foot square window represented by
> > > turnpoint 1
> > > with tears rolling down my cheeks
> > > because after synthesizing as much presumptive
> > > accuracy as possible from all 3 worlds
> > > thats exactly where i land
> > >
> > > & i both trust it & am skeptical of it to that
> > > extent
> > >
> > > & since we know the geocoords of the ellicott rock &
> > > turnpoint 1 in degminsecdec
> > > i think you might even be able to coax my position
> > > out
> > > of your gps calculator faster than i can get it
> > > manually with pencil & paper after reinventing or
> > > supplying the necessary spherical trig
> > > which i will now proceed to do
> > > but i am posting this now without delay in case you
> > > or
> > > anyone else who has been following this would like
> > > to
> > > join the chase & the race to presumptive caus2nyonqc
> > > at 10 foot range
> > >
> > >
> > > & i would also appreciate the backup of the
> > > computational doublecheck
> > > even if you dont race but only chase
> > >
> > > --- Hugh Wallis <hugh@o...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I would be very sceptical of placing much/any
> > > > reliance on that map for
> > > > detailed and highly precise navigation purposes.
> > > > There is no evidence that
> > > > it is the output of proper surveying or reference
> > > to
> > > > official
> > > > documents/treaties etc., and I would suggest that
> > > > there is significant
> > > > cartographic production latitude employed to make
> > > it
> > > > look nice and pretty
> > > > (and perfectly useful for most purposes).
> > > >
> > > > I don't have the USGS quad for that area (but will
> > > > get it shortly) but
> > > > attached is the relevant section from the Canadian
> > > > Government 1:50000 topo
> > > > for reference.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _____
> > > >
> > > > From: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > > [mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com]
> > > > On Behalf Of aletheiak
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 3:44 AM
> > > > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] nyonqc location was Re:
> > > > special congrats may be in
> > > > order for czdepl improvement
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > agreed & no biggie in any case
> > > > but a really interesting upshot of all this is the
> > > > following pair of more
> > > > detailed & reliable
> > > > looking maps of nyonqc than i have ever seen
> > > before
> > >
> > === message truncated ===
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________
> > Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about.
> > Just $16.99/mo. or less.
> > dsl.yahoo.com
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>
> * Visit your group "BoundaryPoint
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint> " on the web.
>
>
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
>
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>
> _____
>