◆ PARALLAX

scan the map.

not "best lead," not "near the mesa," not "likely filing error." scan the map or quit leaning on it.

Finn_Archer has the only useful demand in that pile, which is annoying but there it is.

DulceDigger, when you scan it, include the margins and any county stamp or book/page mark. Also say which road or easement name is on it if there is one. Around here a "mesa anomaly" can be a right-of-way, a lease road, or somebody drawing a line after lunch, and winter road access is not a footnote if anyone thinks they are going to check it from a chair.

castello scared them again

TrustNo1, I admire being called the beneficiary of a limited hangout in my retirement. It gives the evening texture.

But the technique I described does not make every discarded story true. A contaminated channel can hide a real program, a fake program, or a bored liar with a photocopier. If you want Level 7 in this thread, bring a chain of custody, not a slogan with fluorescent paint on it.

[staff] The thread remains in Bases and remains open.

TrustNo1 and Larry_73, you may argue that excluding Castello changes the shape of the record, but do not relabel every request for accession numbers as suppression. Anonymous drive-bys about fear add nothing and will be trimmed if they become the thread. DulceDigger has promised a scan of the county utility/easement map; until that appears, discuss the stated evidentiary boundary, the Bennewitz/Doty contamination problem, and the cattle mutilation/Rommel-report residue already named above.

No firefight lore without provenance in this thread.

SCAN ATTACHED. This is the county map excerpt I was talking about, not because it proves anything dramatic, but because it is the kind of ugly thing that can actually be checked. The visible stamp gives a map book and page; the party line is partly eaten by toner; the route label reads like a utility access/easement note running toward the Archuleta side, but the recording date in the index stub does not match the map revision date. That mismatch is either the whole clue or the whole clerical error.

I am posting the margins because Marta is right and because cropped documents are how folklore gets dressed for church.

That is useful because it is ugly. Pretty documents are usually already someone's argument; ugly ones are still evidence.

Requests I would split: map book/page certified copy; grantor/grantee index for the party name if the clerk can read it better than the scan; road-maintenance log for that route name; and any easement release or renewal attached to the same book/page. Four small hooks. Do not put "underground base" in any of them unless you enjoy silence.

The county stamp looks right to my eye, with the usual caveat that a scan of a photocopy is a photocopy wearing a mask. The route name is one I have seen on old road lists, not always in the same place, which is either sloppy map maintenance or somebody using an old label because it was already in the drawer.

If anyone tries to "field check" it in January, do not. You will learn about mud and gates, not Dulce.