Cdn topo was dated 2000

From: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of aletheiak
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 1:52 PM
To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: nyonqc continuation from czdepl

or yikes it could still just be that some time between 1959 when the seaway was cut & the date of your canadian topo which was what btw cartographic convention gradually or suddenly shifted simply because of the new physical presence of the seaway & not for any legal reason from the old irrational yet intuitive turnpoint position to the new intuitive yet also rational yet still maybe not really legal seaway midway position for so i can now somewhat more educatedly guess following another good happy hour or 2 of internet searching which has nevertheless turned up not a whiff of a suggestion of such an onqc not to say nyonqc law so isnt that a lovely kettle of fish namely a purely presumptive nyonqc situated where a nevertheless physically & measurably determinate channel midway crosses a still confused tho probably not really disputed sector of caus isnt that fantastically lovely because thats what i am beginning to believe we really have here for truest available nyonqc --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak" <aletheiak@y...> wrote: > > a few more aftertones > > of course i didnt mean crown waters included all sweet waters > but certainly at least these most flagrantly navigable ones > > & i now surmise or actually recollect it was late 80s to early 90s when the most major > internal federal waters were allocated to the adjacent provinces > which til then ended at the low water marks on the riverbanks > more or less as they still do along their outer seashores > > so thats my best guessed dating for the federal legislation creating saint lawrence onqc > > & also my reason for pinning it so conveniently to the seaway midway fairway btw > > as well as for thinking the many nyonqc depictions that still pin it to the caus turnpoint > such as your latest map attachment dated 1988 > were likely recently indeed correct > if not legally then > as i suppose > at least as prevailing belief > > > & heres an afterglow for you too > > http://docs.unh.edu/NY/moir17nw.jpg > showing the usgs believed as recently as 1917 in the interpolated turnpoint southwest of > saint regis that canada still shows on your 2000ish topo > > > it makes me want to get on the horn to the ibs & search thru some mansards or orders in > council or whatever you all have up there for laws > at one & the same time > > as well as to guess that the legal definition we eventually will surely find will indeed be > primarily verbal & only secondarily if at all geodetic > > & thus to continue to hope we may yet have to enjoy the honor of pinpointing & > computing for it for the first time in history > > but it is so exciting i almost dont know which direction to turn in first > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak" <aletheiak@y...> wrote: > > > > 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/> . > > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > > >