In a message dated 9/7/2005 10:51:11 A.M. US Eastern Standard Time, KidClerk@aol.com writes: "Have you ever considered pouring your base with a slot in it instead of sticking the stone directly in the concrete? Would this not accomplish what you are after without the ramifications of the stone not having any means to 'breathe'? Then if the stone is broken off in the future, it can be easily removed for repair. What about pouring the base wide enough so that the mower does not have to get so close to the stone and leaving it at ground level?" Oh yes I have. I have also considered building curbs independent of but surrounding the headstones. But come back to two problems, water and weeds. The way I see it Freeze thaw freeze in the slot and maple or "trash" trees like black locusts are both problems with these possible solutions involving a slot in a poured base at or above grade level. Further I thought the objection to the concrete was that it encases the stone and not that it is raised above grade to make a curb? Since concrete has been used years before by the commission and well before it, I have seen many markers that have been set in concrete for decades and have not seen evidence that the concrete has caused the stone to fracture. The vast majority that I have seen broken appear to be broken several inches above the concrete which gives the impression that direct physical force as would occur in vandalism or possibly a mower deck. Am I wrong in assuming that such a stress fracture would occur very close to the cement surface and not several inches above it? As for cost? Labor for repair and resetting of each civilian head stone in concrete costs $150.00, those with frames and additional $25.00 in labor and the total cost of the aluminum for three markers was about $46.50 as I recall. We do what we do in order to gain the maximum repair for the buck. In my time on the commission we have restored quite a few cemeteries and done limited work on some of those that needed. If our method is so bad then how come it WORKS! From my observations I do not have even markers placed in concrete years ago snapping off from compression or disintegrating or even discoloring from salts. As for you comment about what is "wrong", then I will say I think you folks are NOT the authority no matter how much you wish to be. There was one cemetery (Frazier cemetery in Pipe Creek Twp. I think it was) we in the commission did all the repair work ourselves where we salvaged several markers that had been in concrete. I cleaned the concrete off the bases of those stones myself with hammer and chisel without damage to any of them as I recall. Those old headstones had obviously been repaired many years ago with the use of a frame nor dowels and the reset in concrete and that repair had eventually failed it appeared. Of course your seminar did not approve of the use of concrete but then again, as I recall the guy doing the instruction did NOTHING BUT repair the stones in his county and maintain the cemeteries of the county as a paid employee. So no worrys in his life time about how the cemeteries would be maintained and mowed once he restored them. So we adopted his method for setting the military markers because they are so stout and tough and long. But for the old tablets which are relatively fragile we, after discussion within the commission decided, based on our experience in our county, decided on the method you all here are focusing on and objecting to. Rob Hains