Subject: Re: mxus eastern end<br/>
Date: Jan 08, 2002 @ 22:24<br/>
Author: acroorca2002 (&quot;acroorca2002&quot; &lt;orc@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="5250.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="5255.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic5249.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="5252.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="5254.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1345939235">winnie tx<br/>
<br/>
peter happily it has rained a lot since then especially in the <br/>
conchos watershed & tho i didnt revisit continental txse at boca <br/>
chica this time i feel sure it is as wet again there as it was at <br/>
nutatx last weekend<br/>
<br/>
also the difference in the 2 usgs maps of mxus at dry txse is <br/>
probably only owing to their different dates & to some typical <br/>
understanding by usgs as well <br/>
in this case specifically about the variability of the border at the <br/>
river mouth<br/>
<br/>
we ourselves have left off the mxus try pointing & have actually been <br/>
crane whooping & snow goosing etc for a change but are now bearing <br/>
down on the semicardinal extremity counterpart of your txse area or <br/>
what i would like to call txes<br/>
<br/>
indeed texas is such an odd shape that all its semicards are <br/>
evidently double<br/>
<br/>
you may recall we had to invent txwn only last month to distinguish <br/>
it from txnw<br/>
<br/>
by the same reckoning txne & txen are easy to see & distinguish<br/>
<br/>
only the txsw & txws pair seem a little far fetched<br/>
& yet are still quite imaginable & discernible<br/>
<br/>
& if we can find txes then i think we can just aim our camera 3nm ssw <br/>
from there to get latxus<br/>
<br/>
the fact that texas has 9nm of territorial waters & louisiana only <br/>
3nm of them creates another problem for usgs<br/>
but they just dont resolve it here<br/>
<br/>
fortunately it shouldnt affect the position of latxus tho<br/>
<br/>
m  <br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="qreply"> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., &quot;ps1966nl&quot; &lt;smaardijk@y...&gt; wrote:<br/>
&gt; Sadly, there isn&#39;t much for the border anymore to follow <br/>
anyway... &quot;A <br/>
&gt; few sticks in that sand&quot;, now what sort of border is that?<br/>
&gt; <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.uswaternews.com/archives/arcsupply/1oncmig8.html">http://www.uswaternews.com/archives/arcsupply/1oncmig8.html</a><br/>
&gt; Peter S.<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., &quot;ps1966nl&quot; &lt;smaardijk@y...&gt; wrote:<br/>
&gt; &gt; Can someone please explain the difference in the location of the <br/>
&gt; mxus <br/>
&gt; &gt; border at the mouth of the Rio Grande on topozone 1:50k vs. <br/>
1:100k? <br/>
&gt; I <br/>
&gt; &gt; knew that the border shifted with the river (hence the &#39;hinge&#39; in <br/>
&gt; the <br/>
&gt; &gt; Gulf of Mexico), but on the map with the larger scale (b.t.w., <br/>
also <br/>
&gt; &gt; on 1:25k) this apparently hasn&#39;t happened.<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; url&#39;s:<br/>
&gt; &gt; <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?">http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?</a><br/>
z=14&n=2872749&e=685968&s=50&size=l<br/>
&gt; &gt; <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?z=14&n=2872748&e=685968&size=l">http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?z=14&n=2872748&e=685968&size=l</a><br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; Peter S. </span></blockquote></div>