1. mnndsd ideas
    just noticed on the mnndsd topo http://tinyurl.com/grbw wherever the elusive damn line & with it the tripoint may actually fall today in terms of the ndsd line
    Jul 13, 2003 @ 13:00 - m donner ("m donner" <maxivan82@...>)
  2. Re: [BoundaryPoint] mnndsd ideas
    Has anybody noticed that, along MNND about two miles north of the tripoint and along MNSD about 3.5 miles south, the same map says indefinite boundary ? This
    Jul 13, 2003 @ 14:08 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
  3. Re: mnndsd ideas
    We have noticed it. In fact there are many examples of indefinite state lines on the topo maps. I know of at least three state tri-points that are
    Jul 13, 2003 @ 16:04 - bjbutlerus ("bjbutlerus" <bjbutler@...>)
  4. Re: mnndsd ideas
    also it may actually be useful to bear in mind here the term indefinite boundary has a definite meaning or rather at least 3 possible definite meanings either
    Jul 13, 2003 @ 17:39 - acroorca2002 ("acroorca2002" <orc@...>)
  5. Re: mnndsd ideas
    Some time ago I thought the analysis you just presented would account for all known facts about MNNDSD, and that it could be verified by the USACE maps made
    Jul 14, 2003 @ 00:52 - bjbutlerus ("bjbutlerus" <bjbutler@...>)
  6. Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: mnndsd ideas
    Whenever the US federal government undertakes such works as mentioned below, it has to obtain (either through negotiation or eminent domain) the necessary land
    Jul 14, 2003 @ 01:36 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
  7. Re: mnndsd ideas
    good idea maybe even better than asking the tax assessors also i keep bumping into references to a so called adjustment of 1912 performed on the bois de sioux
    Jul 14, 2003 @ 03:30 - acroorca2002 ("acroorca2002" <orc@...>)
  8. Re: mnndsd ideas
    another possible source of the difference between the usgs tripoint position & the tripoint position suggested by the witness monument could be an avulsion
    Jul 14, 2003 @ 23:38 - acroorca2002 ("acroorca2002" <orc@...>)
  9. Re: mnndsd ideas
    You re right, an avulsion at any time after 1858 could account for the USGS line, assuming that was the accreted boundary position at the time of the avulsion.
    Jul 15, 2003 @ 16:48 - bjbutlerus ("bjbutlerus" <bjbutler@...>)
  10. Re: mnndsd ideas
    easy there old pal unless you get your kicks by kicking yourself for we have all the time in the world to reach the truth & thank goodness there are still a
    Jul 16, 2003 @ 02:06 - acroorca2002 ("acroorca2002" <orc@...>)
  11. Re: mnndsd ideas
    Your analysis is good. However, I think someone would have noticed the avulsion, regardless of when it occurred, because I think it must have been man-made.
    Jul 16, 2003 @ 12:54 - bjbutlerus ("bjbutlerus" <bjbutler@...>)