Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] All quiet on the IBC front? - RESEND with ATTACHMENTS<br/>
Date: Dec 12, 2005 @ 22:32<br/>
Author: aletheia kallos (aletheia kallos &lt;aletheiak@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="18978.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Next&emsp;[<a href="topic18978.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="18978.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="18980.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1344300058">thanxx & yes indeed<br/>
still no return call<br/>
tho the commish did confidently promise it <br/>
& fully expected to clear everything up & satisfy our<br/>
inquiry on both caus in general & nyonqc in particular<br/>
<br/>
within 40 minutes <br/>
some 100 hours ago now<br/>
<br/>
which i take to mean not that they are so busy there<br/>
necessarily but that we must have thrown them for more<br/>
than their typical loop<br/>
& that even a concerted effort & the intervening<br/>
weekend werent enough for them to catch up on their<br/>
reading & get all their wayward ducks back into a row<br/>
sensible enough to retire our peculiar request &<br/>
behest & beau geste<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
& now that you too have so nicely confirmed all their<br/>
plotted points on both maps <br/>
with the notable exception of the original & single<br/>
most questionable one i called them on <br/>
namely <br/>
the one you still show unflagged sw of saint regis on<br/>
the canadian topo<br/>
whose coords i still believe may be given on the<br/>
second line here<br/>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/coordinates/SECT-K-83.txt">http://www.internationalboundarycommission.org/coordinates/SECT-K-83.txt</a><br/>
albeit presumably at least mistitled mon andrew<br/>
ellicott if not completely bogus besides<br/>
i think the cause for their delay is clear<br/>
& that it is likely accompanied by some discomfiture<br/>
about this entire data page <br/>
if not total disarray <br/>
& that it has sent them packing to check all their<br/>
sources for all of it<br/>
but for this inexplicable point in particular<br/>
<br/>
for it is my guess that they have at least realized<br/>
that they have this rock in the wrong place<br/>
& possibly also that the whole second line there is<br/>
both bogus & unexplainable<br/>
tho corrected by the usgs sometime between 1917 & 1948<br/>
even if not by canada til at least 2000<br/>
<br/>
but in the meantime <br/>
can you confirm that these coords do fit that single<br/>
still naked turnpoint on your 2nd attachment<br/>
dipping just outside the map frame there sw of 774<br/>
or else that i am indeed mistaken in this surmise<br/>
about its source data<br/>
<br/>
--- Hugh Wallis &lt;<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:hugh@...">hugh@...</a>&gt; wrote:<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; No news is - well - no news I guess.<br/>
&gt;  <br/>
&gt; In the interim, here are the US and Canadian maps of<br/>
&gt; the NYONQC area with<br/>
&gt; key points on each marked with flags at turnpoints<br/>
&gt; and boundary markers in<br/>
&gt; the same georeferenced overlay, clearly showing the<br/>
&gt; discrepancy aletheiak<br/>
&gt; points out (as well as the consistency elsewhere).<br/>
&gt;  <br/>
&gt; Enjoy<br/>
&gt;  <br/>
&gt; Hugh <br/>
&gt; <br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>__________________________________________________<br/>
Do You Yahoo!?<br/>
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around <br/>
<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://mail.yahoo.com">http://mail.yahoo.com</a></div>