Mike wrote:

> you bet
> & which means it is the law of the land in mexico
> under the mexican constitution
>
> a law doesnt have to be in the constitution to be legal

Of course. I think his point was that, since it's only a statute and not in the
constitution, the change for which he agitates can and should be accomplished.
Perhaps his point is also that the constitution does not make mention of any
such 20 meters of dry land as part of the federal dependency, so therefore the
states and locals should have more authority over it.

> as i understand all the above & below
> as well as other things i have seen
> tho i still havent yet read the full law yet
> yes indeed
> the 20 meter strip is outside the territory of the states
> as well as excluded from their jurisdiction
> basically because it is just part of the much larger & continuous
> federal maritime territorial zone
> which includes not just this dry terrestrial margin
> but all the tidelands as well
> & moreover continues at least 12nm out to sea beyond the low tide line

But, by the definition of the ZoFeMaT in the Ley General de Bienes Nacionales,
it is ONLY the 20-meter strip coastal strip plus the surfaces of the odd keys
and reefs. It does NOT include the sea bed. It's the Zona Federal Marítima
Terrestre (Federal Maritime LAND Zone), not the Zona Federal Marítima
Territorial (Federal Maritime Territorial Zone). Indeed, no statute would be
needed to put the tidelands and territorial sea into the federal public domain.
That's already in the constitution.

For the reasons that I derived from my earlier recitation of the constitutional
articles, I believe that the feds can hold the ZoFeMaT in the public domain
under statute, and they can probably manage and control it as much as they can
any federal property, but they cannot deny it as part of the territories of the
respective coastal states.

Lowell G. McManus
Leesville, Louisiana, USA