A nice but small picture of Donostia Airport Runway (with in the
background Hendaye-Plage) at:
http://www.bidasoacongress.com/euskera/home/bidtxin.htm .
The pierheads seem to be not of equal length. Would this then mean
that the upper boundary of the Baie du Figuier is an oblique line? See
the top two pictures at
http://www.bidasoacongress.com/euskera/home/entorno.htm . I can see it
on the topo map, too.
Peter S.
--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., michael donner <m@d...> wrote:
> ok wonderful
> that confirms & fills in a good deal
>
> & no problem about the tripuncticides
>
> i figure i killed at least 150 tps myself out in the ocean
yesterday
>
> best of all
> from the ashes here arises possibly the worlds first full semiclave
> it being both a semienclave & a semiexclave
> or as you say an enclaved condominium
> a condition at least i dont think i have seen anywhere before
>
>
> & as for esesfrfr2
> glad to restore it with you from the more complicated fallback
position
> between the railroad bridges to the simpler & first guessed position
> between the pierheads
> or perhaps they are really only jetties on revisitation
> but to the median point between their tips in any case
> tho i would do this more on the strength of my original hunch
> before i ever studied any of these maps
> than because i trust the visible or the unseen portions of the map
in
> message 1481 or the zoomable one in message 1555
> as these have already proved unreliable in several ways
>
>
> so in sum & review
> the only known remaining esesfrfr tripoints are now looking like a
well
> matched pair of median points situated with elegant simplicity at
both the
> front & the back entrances to the bay
>
> m
>
>
> >
> >I think it's _you_ who's straightening _me_ out now, Michael. I was
> >looking at the Descheemaeker map
> >in my msg. 1481, but according to all the written stuff I have read
about
> >it, it might be the way
> >you describe it.
> >
> >But reading the Bayonne treaty again, I come to a different
conclusion
> >still, which could mean there
> >are no tripoints, but an enclaved condominium!
> >
> >"Art.9
> >>From Chapitelacoarria to the mouth of the Bidasoa, at the Rade du
> >>Figuier, the middle of the main
> >stream of the waters of this river, at low tide, will form the line
of
> >separation of the two
> >Sovereignties, without changing anything about the actual
nationality of
> >the islands, the Ile des
> >Faisans continuing to belong to two Nations".
> >
> >So there is talk of the main stream. Nowadays, this is the branch
on the
> >French side. But this
> >hasn't always been the case. At one time, Descheemaeker writes, the
French
> >branch almost
> >disappeared, and some work had to be done in order for the island
to
> >remain an island. But since
> >then all sorts of land reclaiming works along the river have taken
place,
> >and given the fact that
> >there are a number of islands in the river, the main stream
probably
> >changed over the years. I think
> >(but this isn't based on anything I have read) that the main stream
at the
> >time of the signing in
> >1856 is the important one here, and that the border hasn't changed
since
> >(in that respect. What I
> >mean is: not changed except when explicitely done in other treaties
or
> >similar documents).
> >
> >So let's assume that the French branch was the main one in 1856.
Then the
> >condominium is entirely
> >surrounded by Spanish internal waters.
> >
> >Sorry for killing off the tripoints. But a centre line in any river
branch
> >just doesn't touch any
> >island's shoreline!
> >
> >Now for the Txingudi bay (the part between the main railway bridge
and the
> >pierheads: Maybe it was
> >at one stage included in the Figuier condominium, but according to
the
> >topo map (IGN 1:25k) not
> >anymore. A clear boundary line has been drawn all the way to the
> >pierheads, and even a little beyond
> >that, but that last part doesn't count I would think. The boundary
seems
> >to follow the centre of the
> >stream at low tide, but generally passes very close to the spanish
shore.
> >This seems to be partly
> >because the Spanish have done a lot of land reclaiming here,
building the
> >runway for the
> >Donostia/San Sebastián airport at Hondarribia there (very
Hongkong-style).
> >If an aircraft overshoots
> >the runway and ends up a couple of meters further in the water, it
> >definitely has crossed the
> >border! By the way, there is an international agreement between
France and
> >Spain on the crossing of
> >French airspace for aircraft in and out of Donostia airport. The
only
> >approach is from sea, flying
> >over Hendaye Plage, and then over Txingudi bay. It is a tiny
airport, but
> >can take (and takes! I've
> >seen it) aircraft up to DC 9's.
> >
> >Peter S.
> >
> >michael donner wrote:
> >
> >> first thanx for the tactful hint peter
> >> as all these franco spanish condo tripoints could be called
frfrspsp only
> >> in my fractured isofips
> >> a coinage as adulterated as punctology itself
> >> & of course they should all be changed to esesfrfr in the kings
iso
> >> tho the suffixes 1 2 3 & 4 can still probably continue to serve
pro tem
> >> to indicate the generally ascending &or eastward progression of
the 4 such
> >> points you have turned up so far
> >> of which i take it we were talking here about number 3 in the
line
> >>
> >> your observations themselves are a little puzzling to me tho
because i
> >> thought you had indicated earlier that the all dry or upper condo
is the
> >> island itself
> >> or is coterminous with the island
> >> & also that the international boundary is defined in such a way
as to meet
> >> this condo boundary precisely at the upstream & downstream
extremities of
> >> the island
> >> or at least to make a sort of wedge out of it i think you said
> >>
> >> your map in <http://www.egroups.com/message/boundarypoint/1481>
> >>http://www.egroups.com/message/boundarypoint/1481 makes this
> >> pretty clear too
> >> if it can be believed
> >>
> >> perhaps i have only imagined some of these details
> >> but all together they are what led me to predict that the 2 ile
de la
> >> conference tripoints at least would be easy to put a finger on
> >>
> >> & your pic in message 1703
> >> <http://www.originepyrenees.com/images_mag/ile.jpg>
> >>http://www.originepyrenees.com/images_mag/ile.jpg
> >> now that i compare it to the map
> >> appears to give a very good view indeed of tripoint esesfrfr3 at
left
> >> as well as a pretty fair view of tripoint esesfrfr4 at right
> >>
> >> however if the international boundary does cleave invariably to a
thalweg
> >> or thalwegs
> >> as you now seem to be indicating
> >> then it couldnt & wouldnt even touch the island
> >> & if it does describe the center line of the river invariably
> >> as you may also mean
> >> then it could only strike the island by chance if indeed it did
so at all
> >> & would thus in just about every possible case not produce the
neat results
> >> i had envisioned
> >> & on which i based the guesses made both above & below
> >>
> >> your guess that it might be off frame at left would place it
within the
> >>river
> >> where i was least expecting it based on the above info
> >> & moreover you seem to be talking about 3 thalwegs here in all
> >> as if to indicate this is a river confluence rather than an
ordinary
> >>island
> >> & i know there was some reference made to changes in the
river but
> >> but perhaps you can straighten me out here again too
> >>
> >> m
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Ile de la Conference: you're looking eastwards. So the point
towards
> >> >you is the westernmost point (frfreses[number]). Still, it being
at
> >> >the meeting point of the center lines (or thalwegs) of the two
> >> >branches of the Bidasoa and the center line/thalweg of the
> >> >continuation of that river, it might be that it is just beyond
this
> >> >picture at your left.
> >> >
> >> >Peter S.
> >> >
> >> >--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., michael donner <m@d...> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > evidently our first close look here at either frfrspsp3 or
> >> >frfrspsp4
> >> >> as i cant tell which end of the ile de conference this is
> >> >>
> >> >> m
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> >><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
><"http://rd.yahoo.com/M=163100.1357384.2947150.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700126166=
:N/A=5
> >24804/*http://www.classmates.com/index.tf?s=2629"
target="_top">Cick here
> >for Classmates.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> ><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Yahoo! Terms of Service.