----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 10:45
PM
Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Answers
from the IBC
Perhaps I should work for the IBC!
On Friday,
June 6, 2003, at 01:42 PM, Peter Smaardijk wrote:
Thanks Doug!
More below.
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com,
Doug Murray <doug@d...>
wrote:
>
> Hello all:
>
> The following email just
arrived from the IBC. My comments follow!
>
>
Doug
>
> Dear Mr. Murray,
>
> Your request for
information was forwarded to my attention. I will
> address your
questions in the order they were presented.
>
>
> 1. I
passed this question on to Mr. David Gray, a maritime boundary
>
specialist with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and
he
provided
> me with the following answer: "Throughout the 526
nautical mile
length
> of the boundary between Canada and France
that surrounds the French
> islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon,
theboundary touches the low
water
> mark of two islets that are
Canadian; namely:
>
> Point 4 of the 1972 Agreement between
Canada and France is
described as
> "The low water mark on the
south-westernmost point of Enfant Perdu
> (Canada)",Point 5 of the
1972 Agreement between Canada and France
is
> described as "The low
water mark on the west point of the
> south-westernmost island of
theLittle Green Island group".
>
> By being at the low water
mark at the most South-westerly or
Westerly
> point of these
islets, the boundary does not cross these islets.
There
> are no
islets thatare in between any of the turning points of the
> boundary;
therefore, nowhere does the boundary cross any
other
islet".
>
>
> [So... do we consider this case
closed??]
Well... we could. I think that we already came to a good
conclusion,
albeit not confirmed officially. This remark by Mr.
Arseneault
doesn't really address explicitly the problem of the
boundary
crossing the islands of the turning points. He _does_ say that
the
boundary doesn't cross the islands, but he could have said that
the
boundary in that case makes a detour from the line as described
in
the treaty. Or that that line only applies to the sea, not to
the
land. But in practice both Canada and France will stick to
this
explanation. Until something really important happens on the piece
of
land that we focus on... Not very likely :-)
Peter
S.
PS:
(...)
[ If only you could see the smile on my
face! I have responded that
I would love to join the crews along
Zero Ave and Point Roberts! I
asked for permission to take photos as well
] (...)
I can imagine that! An official BP representative present
at the
IBC!
<image.tiff>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
the Yahoo! Terms of
Service .
Doug
Murray Productions
1211 Cotton Drive
Vancouver
BC