--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., michael donner <m@d...> wrote:
> great
> this is hot
> & it sure looks like you have caught the territorial changes in mid
air
>
> for whatever grundstuecken may actually mean
> it could well have been referring here to the historically dry land
parcels
> that became submerged by the dam
> & thus already practically transferred by nature to the condo area
> while the new treaty & laws might have merely been confirming this
new reality
> since it would have been much harder if not impossible to deny &
resist it
> anyway
>
I didn't think of this possibility yet, but it sounds very reasonable.
But the Grundstuecken may well be those pieces of land that were
submerged following the building of the dam. They should be taken out
of the land register, acc. to this law. But that could well mean they
cease to exist altogether as dry land, and the wet territory replacing
it is now part of the condo.
The 'old' islands in the rivers were probably already been taken care
of in the 1816 treaty anyway, and to my knowledge no new islands were
added, at least not following the building of the dam.
> imagine the alternative
> a navigable waterway made condo for convenience in the first place
> now comprising 3 stripes of water with 3 different statuses of
nationality
>
> a likely reason too for the difference between this bassin &
pickwick
>
>
> as for the islands
> the befrlu aerial photo from jesper in message 1235 is likely
typical of
> islands within the condo
> so i would like to just count them all in at least provisionally
>
>
> alternatively or additionally
> this leaves that peculiar left bank territory of luxembourg around
vianden
> to also marvel at
> the unique exception to & break in the delu condo
>
> not knowing its history
> i can only wonder if it was a result of the dam
> say
> a necessary expedient for bypassing the dam & leaving it entirely in
> luxembourg for some reason i cant say
>
> but its high ground also suggests it might hold a castle that
historically
> belonged to or dominated vianden
> so this strange exception could just as easily have long predated
the dam
>
> thus all the more reason the data you are seeking here will be
interesting
>
> for unless we find an old map that could also settle this question
> there is a possibility that the grundstuecken referred to are the
parcels
> of this left bank territory
>
> m
I'm absolutely positive the Vianden boundary detour precedes the
building of the dam and has nothing to do with it. Rather, the
building of the dam was facilitated by the fact that at that spot both
river banks belong to Luxembourg. Anyway, the border is meandering
considerably here (why else need 27 intermediate boundary markers?). I
suspect it has something to do with the position of Vianden castle and
its military importance in times long gone.
Peter S.
>
>
> >
> >In
>
><http://www.salomonia.com/Bundesrecht/verlauf_gemeinsame_staatsgrenzeG/verlauf_
> >gemeinsame_staatsgrenze-text.htm>
>
>http://www.salomonia.com/Bundesrecht/verlauf_gemeinsame_staatsgrenzeG/verlauf_ge
> >meinsame_staatsgrenze-text.htm
> >(the law that puts the 1984 treaty into force), there is talk of
> >Grundstuecken (parcels of land), that have to be taken out of the
> >German land register, because they are situated within the
territory
> >of joint sovereignty as defined in the treaty (art. 3 (1) 2 and 3
(1)
> >3). This is the first time I see some proof of dry pieces of this
> >condominium in print (although I think I can see some tiny islands
on
> >the 1:20k map of Vianden and surroundings that fall in between the
> >boundaries along the river banks as well). Unless "Grundstuecken"
is
> >German legalese for parcels of anything, including water. Can
somebody
> >enlighten me on that? And can someone come up with the text of this
> >treaty? So far, I've been unable to find it.
> >
> >Peter S.
> >
> >--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., michael donner <m@d...> wrote:
> >> profuse thanxxx peter
> >>
> >> this all feels great
> >>
> >> & i agree about monuments 19 & 47
> >> for now i can envision them marking dedelulu condo tripoints on
the
> >left
> >> bank of the river & dam lake respectively
> >> if i understand you correctly
> >> & thus i would also expect them to have condo terminus mates on
the
> >> respective right banks more or less directly opposite
> >> but the mates will in that case just be marking points on the
delulu
> >line
> >> rather than tripoints
> >>
> >> in other words no trilines around vianden as at befrlu & bedelu
> >>
> >>
> >> also
> >> while looking forward to your further comments on bedelu
> >>
> >> considering the narrowness of the river condo there
> >> & assuming it even persists that far upriver
> >> which i do assume now based on your new info
> >> & pending any more details
> >> & considering also the shortness & interruptedness of the
riverine
> >sectors
> >> of the bede boundary continuing up the ours from bedelu
> >> i would venture to guess we will not find any bede river condos
> >anywhere
> >> but only a single linear bede boundary from bedelu to bedenl
> >> & would douse the hope i once had of a bicondo quadripoint at
> >bedelu
> >>
> >> also
> >> just to fully embrace the benelux try again
> >> considering the shortness & interruptedness of the riverine
sectors
> >of the
> >> denl boundary
> >> i would also venture to guess a single linear boundary again in
that
> >case
> >> except just possibly for a condo on the rhine sector
> >>
> >>
> >> but beyond that
> >> since you bring word now of a more pervasive river condo culture
> >than might
> >> be indicated by just the 2 or 4 positive finds you have made
along
> >the esfr
> >> & delu frontiers
> >> especially with the account of that wonderful sanctuary ferry
> >custom
> >> it seems worth staying alert now to the possibility of finding
other
> >> surviving river condos on other european boundaries than just
these
> >>
> >> m
> >>
> >>
> >> ps
> >> it seems almost a necessity that river condos keep moving with a
> >changing
> >> river
> >> but a luxury & a rarity when simple riverine boundary lines do
> >>
> >> i think vianden is odder for the boundary detour than the condo
> >expansion
> >>
> >>
> >> also
> >> the 1263 breakthru by peter you mentioned was building since
message
> >293
> >> tho the companion suggestion in that message re atchde has
> >probably been
> >> busted by gideon
> >> so this particular search you have so beautifully advanced again
now
> >is a
> >> terrific survivor
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., michael donner <m@d...> wrote:
> >> >> still working in the dark for lack of an 1815 treaty of vienna
> >text
> >> >> & still clueless also about any later international agreements
> >that
> >> >could
> >> >> have affected the river condo or condos originally created
then
> >> >>
> >> >> but a lucky catch at
> >> >> <<http://www.luxembourg.co.uk/fish_border.html>
> >>http://www.luxembourg.co.uk/fish_border.html>
> >> >><http://www.luxembourg.co.uk/fish_border.html>
> >>http://www.luxembourg.co.uk/fish_border.html
> >> >> makes the delu river condo on the moselle at schengen aka
defrlu
> >> >> which several members have already pointed out with pix &
maps
> >> >> seem likely to continue northward
> >> >> first all the way down the moselle to wasserbillig
> >> >> & from there all the way up the tributary river sauer to
> >wallendorf
> >> >> & finally all the way up its tributary river the our to
bedelu
> >> >> except in this last case for a very short stretch around
vianden
> >> >where the
> >> >> delu boundary leaves the river our
> >> >>
> >> >> this single detour breaks the possible river condo territory
into
> >> >two
> >> >> separate pieces
> >> >> & may produce a pair of riparian condo tripoints in the
process
> >> >> one just southeast & the other just north of vianden
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >It looks like you're right. I have a 1:20k map here of the
Vianden
> >> >area, and the points where the border leaves the river Our are
at
> >> >boundary marker 47 (north of Vianden) and boundary marker 19
(south
> >of
> >> >Vianden). These boundary markers are likely to be pairs, one on
> >each
> >> >bank. Moreover, because of the large width of the river north of
> >> >Vianden (it is the Bassin Inferieur lake formed by the river dam
at
> >> >Vianden), the boundaries are clearly depicted as following both
> >banks,
> >> >thus leaving the condominium in the middle. I find it strange
> >> >(although understandable) that the border obviously changed,
> >because
> >> >the lake certainly wasn't there in 1815, and the borders are
> >following
> >> >the lake shore lines. This is unlike the US example (I believe
it
> >was
> >> >in Tennessee) mentioned in this group a couple of days ago.
> >Normally,
> >> >a boundary stays the same, even if a river changes its course,
> >unless
> >> >a new boundary is negotiated. Perhaps that's what has been
> >happening
> >> >in Vianden.
> >> >
> >> >The border situation is all the more obvious, since south of bdy
> >> >marker 47 a municipal sectional border continues southwards
through
> >> >the middle of the lake, and across the dam.
> >> >
> >> >I found another nice piece of evidence of the special status of
the
> >> >delu boundary rivers. According to
> >> ><<http://webplaza.pt.lu/public/rleick/BrueckeSchengen.html>
> >>http://webplaza.pt.lu/public/rleick/BrueckeSchengen.html>
> >> ><http://webplaza.pt.lu/public/rleick/BrueckeSchengen.html>
> >>http://webplaza.pt.lu/public/rleick/BrueckeSchengen.html , on the
> >> >river ferries a right of asylum once existed. When someone that
was
> >> >persecuted could reach a ferryboat, he could stay there for six
> >weeks
> >> >and three days, without fear of being arrested. If he succeeded,
> >after
> >> >this time, to make three steps on dry ground, the asylum was
> >renewed
> >> >for six weeks.
> >> >When a persecuted person wanted to go to the other side, the
> >ferryman
> >> >would bring him over, return, and only then take the persecutors
on
> >> >board!
> >> >It looks like this is some old law, preceding the condominium of
> >1815.
> >> >Possibly the condominium solution even so much as succeded the
old,
> >> >already existing legal practises at the border rivers.
> >> >
> >> >Peter S.
> >> >
> >> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >>
>
>><"<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=177880.1317466.2915209.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700126166:N/
> >>A=6>
>
>>http://rd.yahoo.com/M=177880.1317466.2915209.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700126166:N/A=6>
> >>>
>
>>36748/*<http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;2720899;5684702;u?http://www.business.co
> >>m/>
>
>>http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;2720899;5684702;u?http://www.business.com/"
> >> >target="_top">Fnd Business Information Your use of Yahoo!
Groups
> >is
> >> >subject to the <<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
> >>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Yahoo! Terms of
> >> >Service.
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
><http://rd.yahoo.com/M=190481.1393724.2979175.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700126166:N/A=61
> >3960/?http://www.newaydirect.com target="_top"> Your use of
Yahoo!
> >Groups is subject to the <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Yahoo!
Terms
> >of Service.