- paleo lamaya initial monument & mapiyu corner cases closed i think
aha it turns out there actually was a yuma county vs maricopa county 1918 border suit so the accumulated puzzle pieces now strongly suggest that it was the
Dec 13, 2004 @ 21:35 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
- Re: [BoundaryPoint] paleo lamaya initial monument & mapiyu corner cases closed i think
Great digging, Mike! I agree with almost all of your conclusions, particularly your new interpretation of the Initial Monument having been Atwood s--in
Dec 14, 2004 @ 01:25 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
- Re: paleo lamaya initial monument & mapiyu corner cases closed i think
thanx tho thats why i say as has been widely presumed for all the statutes you keep citing actually say is 113d20m as defined by the atwood survey etc which
Dec 14, 2004 @ 17:53 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
- Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: paleo lamaya initial monument & mapiyu corner cases closed i think
In this business, any interpretation is tentative (to one degree or another), pending the receipt of better data. Your conclusions regarding a virtual-only
Dec 14, 2004 @ 18:30 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)
- Re: paleo lamaya initial monument & mapiyu corner cases closed i think
but clearly on piyu either usgs mapping in all 3 scales as recently as 1990 is wrong or the latest revision of the arizona revised statutes is wrong but come
Dec 14, 2004 @ 18:53 - aletheiak ("aletheiak" <aletheiak@...>)
- Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: paleo lamaya initial monument & mapiyu corner cases closed i think
I agree. One thing that we don t know is the date of the latest revision of the statutes relating to the Pima-Yuma boundary. They might have been revised
Dec 15, 2004 @ 05:44 - Lowell G. McManus ("Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@...>)