brilliant
maestro
thank you
congrats are already in order no matter what the result
& the only remaining question i might have
if the border does jump from the thalweg to the marker & back
then by exactly what route does it get there
tho this may never need to be asked
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus"
<mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> The web site of the International Boundary and Water
Commission (US Section)
> invites questions by e-mail from members of the public to the
Public Affairs
> Office at the IWBC headquarters in El Paso. Therefore, I have
sent them the
> question below. This is not meant to compete with Mr.
Nadybal's proposed
> inquiry at Washington, but the IWBC's presence there is only a
"Special
> Assistant" who is housed within the State Department's Office
of Mexican
> Affairs. Perhaps he's thinking of a different agency, the
International
> Boundary Commission (US Section), which has its
headquarters in Washington, but
> it only deals with the Canadian border.
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Hello,
>
> While I am a resident of Louisiana, I own property within sight
of the border
> near Eagle Pass, Texas. I have a greater-than-average
interest in the US/Mexico
> boundary.
>
> I have some questions regarding the boundary monuments on
bridges. I am aware
> that bridges on the Rio Grande section of the boundary have
upon them a boundary
> monument placed by the IWBC or one of it predecessors. I
have noted several
> examples where the Rio Grande has moved by accretion such
that it is no longer
> under the monuments on the bridges. I know that (in the
absence of treaty
> provisions to the contrary) it is a general principal of boundary
study that
> water boundaries move with accretion of the waterbodies that
constitute the
> boundary.
>
> The railroad bridge at Eagle Pass/Piedras Negras makes a
prime example. The
> bridge was built in 1922, and the monument on the bridge
stands beside the steel
> superstructure on a stone masonry bridge pier that must have
been in the middle
> of the river at that time. Since then, however, the river has
moved by
> accretion significantly southward. The bridge pier upon which
the monument sits
> is high and dry, perhaps fifty feet or more from the north margin
of the river
> at its normal stage. The area is easily accessible by road and
appears to be
> something of a lovers' lane. It is possible to drive a motor
vehicle all the
> way around the base of the pier upon which the boundary
monument sits.
>
> My questions related to this and other similar examples are
these:
>
> 1. Does the placement of an IWBC monument on a
port-of-entry bridge permanently
> fix the boundary at that point on the bridge structure, trumping
the effects of
> any future accretion of the river; OR is the monument on the
bridge merely a
> curious relict of where the boundary once was when the bridge
was built?
>
> 2. If the placement of a monument on a bridge permanently
fixes the boundary on
> the bridge structure, then under which sovereignty is the dry
land on one side
> of the river that is directly beneath the opposite nation's part of
the bridge?
>
> 3. If the boundary deviates from the moveable middle of the
river and extends
> one way or the other to a monument permanently fixed on a
bridge, thus creating
> a finger of one nation into the other, how wide is that finger? Is
it only as
> wide as the physical structure of the bridge, or is it as wide as
the respective
> railroad or highway's right-of-way?
>
> 4. Are there actually any answers to such questions as these,
or are they
> resolved only case-by-case as the need arises?
>
> I thank you for your attention and for whatever answers you can
provide.
>
> Lowell G. McManus
> Leesville, Louisiana, USA