Who owns this lake? Yosemite or Emigrant?

[maverick]

I claim it in the name of Spain. Why the heck not?

Heck no Russ, we claim it in the name of HST!

[rlown]

2017 meet-up site?

[maverick]

The Yosemite Resource Manager wrote, that the info has been forwarded to Yosemite's GIS specialist, they hope to have us an answer by the end of the week.

2017 meet-up site?

Highly unlikely Russ, but if it is on the Emigrant side then maybe, if on the Yosemite side then no.

[oldranger]

Check this 1905 Map.http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/ ... m1/1/zoom/ Key is the description of the boundary on the nw corner of the map. "Divide Between Cherry Creek and Eleanor and Falls Creeks" Therefore the lake is not in Yosemite and any other boundary is probably based on the 1956 usgs map error.

[maverick]

Check this 1905 Map.http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/ ... m1/1/zoom/ Key is the description of the boundary on the nw corner of the map. "Divide Between Cherry Creek and Eleanor and Falls Creeks" Therefore the lake is not in Yosemite and any other boundary is probably based on the 1956 usgs map error.

Interesting Mike, but even though it was establish by Congress, that was back in 1905, wonder how many times that lake has changed sides by more present (last few decades) surveyors, and then by current GIS people. Looking forward to see what Yosemite's GIS person comes up with, and then what the Emigrant Wilderness Manager has to says.

[rlown]

If no one claims it, then It's the Larry Conn lake!!

Just sayin..

[maverick]

If no one claims it, then It's the Larry Conn lake!!

Just sayin..

Already have an unnamed lake up Goodale Canyon, across the ridge from Taboose Pass waiting for that Russ, a fine small lake with a beautiful fluted unnamed peak behind it, but that process is not happening for a few more years.

[rlown]

ok. keep us in the loop. He deserves a memorial.

[balzaccom]

I don't know if any of you use mappingsupport.com Gmap4...pretty cool stuff.

Here's a link to it....shows that the boundary for Emigrant includes the lake....and the boundary for Yosemite bends the other way and ALSO includes the lake. ON THE SAME MAP!

Check it out. Use the t7 World Topo ESRI version...

http://www.mappingsupport.com/p/gmap4.p ... rought.txt

[oldranger]

maverick wrote:

Interesting Mike, but even though it was establish by Congress, that was back in 1905, wonder how many times that lake has changed sides by more present (last few decades) surveyors, and then by current GIS people. Looking forward to see what Yosemite's GIS person comes up with, and then what the Emigrant Wilderness Manager has to says.

Regardless of what surveyors or map makers have done unless there has been subsequent legislation the boundary described in the legislation is the boundary. If someone today were to rule otherwise they are usurping the decision of congress. I am still convinced that the inclusion in yosemite in some maps is simply the reflection of a drawing error that took place in the USGS office. It is practically a moot question since both jurisdictions are almost equally protected but I guess grazing could be permitted if Stanislaus NF actually realized that the area was within its domain, though not exactly prime grazing from a google earth view.

I'm sure the original description is in the Yosemite archives and that is why the Yosemite map excludes the lake. Stanislaus NF probably does not have access to that and their records are dependent on the USGS maps and their base maps for the forest probably date back to sometime after the 1956 map was made.