i believe the goodly doctor has it right
because the usgs topo indicates monument 255 is missing
from the mxus line
where it should fall about a mile to the east
& the map also shows 256 is in the location shown on the
postcard
so the numerical identification supposedly made by the postcard
could well be mistaken
or could have gotten mistransmitted somewhere along the way
& the geocachers also might easily have found a working
replacement monument 255 in the proper place
or might have mistaken some other monument like say a 255a
for the original 255 that is so clearly numbered in victors photos
besides i think the monument on the postcard no longer exists
& victors 255 was probably imported to its present location from
its original location a mile away
so the mysterious transformation in both the appearance &
location of the postcard rock & victors rock is better explained by
the fact that they are simply different rocks
yes both have been retired from active service
but thats all they have in common
& no need to confuse them just for that reason
--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "Doug Murray" <doug@d...> wrote:
>
> A page over that the fun Geocaching site (great concept -- we
border freaks should leave little treasures at tri-points for other
border freaks) revealed a nice selection of USMX border markers
-- and others.
>
>
http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?ID=40654
>
> There are some of USMX #255 -- very odd, as there is a big
fence and you see only the top. Not at all like the #255 in Victor's
photos #1 and #3. Could it be the top of the jumbo maker in
photo #2?
>
> http://img.groundspeak.com/cache/log/724020_300.jpg
> http://img.groundspeak.com/cache/log/724020_200.jpg
>
> Cheers!
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: acroorca2002
> To: BoundaryPoint@y...
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 5:09 AM
> Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: USMX - The elusive marker #255
>
>
> this mon 255 is quite interesting & unusual
> in that it was deliberately misplaced
> & i believe few others like it will be found anywhere
> so congrats are in order for finding such a rarity
>
> but the other type you mention is quite common
>
> it is called an indirect marking under some circumstances
> usually when occurring in pairs or series
> as is often done in europe & on the wet parts of caus
> & is called a witness monument under other circumstances
> usually when there is only one of a kind
> as is more common within the usa
>
> but i wonder if anyone can point to any mates at all for mon
255
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., Victor Cantore <drpotatoes@y...>
> wrote:
> > ugggh it took me a long time to finally locate this
> > marker and the reason for that is that its not on the
> > border at all but about 50 meters in US territory.
> > It's at the San Ysidro Port of Entry (SYPOE) here in
> > san diego.
> >
> > My guess to why it's not on the actual border itself
> > is due to expansion at sypoe it had to be moved since
> > at one point it was on the line. Also looks like it
> > isn't the original judging from the post card
> > attachement either.
> >
> > it's placed directly at the end of the trolley tracks
> > but surprising easy to just walk past and miss. and
> > someone obviously took offense to the marker's claims
> > that it marks the limit of mexican territory.
> >
> > There's another similar marker in Baarle, in that it
> > doesn't sit exactly on the line but rather denotes the
> > location nearby of an international boundary. I wonder
> > how many of those there are in the world my hunch is
> > that it is more common than i'd like to think.
> >
> > vc
> >
> >
> >
>
__________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> > http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.