Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] more about the local points
Date: Feb 17, 2001 @ 20:30
Author: Michael Donner ("Michael Donner" <m@...>)
Prev Post in Topic Next [All Posts]
Prev Post in Time Next
am really thinking now of taking a plane ride to photograph the bscuus or bahamas cuba usa tripoint from a safe enough distance so as not to provoke the cuban air force
& i now believe it can be done
but since i dont have my prescott with me
i can only dimly recall that the cuus line is the one that has been negotiated
& possibly the bscu line also
but not the bsus line
at least i think i remember being surprised that the bahamas were the odd man out in this picture
can anyone confirm this
or better yet can anyone give the geocoords for the easternmost point on the cuus line
yes i am serious this time
since this point must be at least the temporary best guess for the tripoint position
especially if the eastern terminus of cuus was diplomatically calculated to be equidistant from the bahamas & cuba & the usa
as would seem the only sensible place to end that line
& would therefore produce a bilateral & putative if not yet the trilaterally agreed position for the tripoint
the approximate point of equidistance from all 3 countries appears to lie
50 miles south of 7 mile bridge of the usa
50 miles west of the double headed shot cays of the bahamas &
50 miles north of varadero cuba
or approx n lat 23 deg 56 min & w long 81 deg 13 min
a position positively reinforced by a usgs navigational chart i also saw today depicting a suspiciously tripunctive lurch in the eez boundary just there
maybe if i can just fly high enough on a clear enough day to photograph all 3 countries in a single frame
that would do the job
& no need to mess with geocoords nor danger
the other point i started to mention below
i mean the one west of the dry tortugas
is not actually a tripoint
tho it is a point where 3 different legal regimes meet
the 3 mile & 3 league state limits & the federal waters
the 3 mile & 3 league limits collide in 2 other places
both of which occur at or actually produce distinct tripoints
namely alflus & latxus
but only here do the regimes just feather together indistinctly
you can see the clearest of the 3 usgs depictions of the supreme court ruling that affirmed all 3 points at
http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?z=16&n=3343656&e=459236&s=200&size=m&symshow=n
the red angle point at center being actually the alflus tripoint
i cant help wondering tho why the usgs did not make the 3 league line curve westward around the 3 mile line there
since i would think alabama has no claim to equidistance with florida beyond its own 3 mile limit
that long northsouth line joining the 2 limits there smacks like a cop out by the usgs
but i dont know
maybe it was in the court decision that way
interestingly the usgs does not even attempt to show the corresponding transition around the latxus tripoint
or else maybe topozone crops it out
i also dont know why
perhaps because the geographical situation is so hopelessly complex in that particular area
but when you look at the third & most bizarre of these transitions
i mean the one in the dry tortugas
tho also badly cropped by topozone at
http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?z=17&n=2728934&e=312222&s=200&size=l
you can see at the left margin the beginning of what looks like another cop out by the usgs
linking the 2 regimes in this case with an eastwest connector line
while there again appears to be no logical reason for doing so
i also saw a usgs navigational chart this morning apparently reiterating this oddly casual alignment
again i would think the 3 league line coming down from the north should just continue naturally & wrap around the 3 mile line coming across from the east
like a larger cloud descending on & absorbing a smaller one
but no
here again a cardinally oriented rupture in reality
yet perpendicular to the previous one
in any case all very strange
m
>From: "Michael Donner"
>Reply-To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [BoundaryPoint] more about the local points
>Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 15:34:11
>