My Yahoo U.S. county highpointing group is in the midst of a discussion that
we have had before, with no consenus having been reached. One of things we do
is visit the highpoints of contiguous counties and form large numbers of such
[high point] visited, conitguous counties into "globs." Some of us have over
900 counties in such globs.
The question arises, "What constitutes contiguousity?" Most of us agree that
counties across even large rivers and bodies of water such as San Francisco
Bay are contiguous, and maps exist showing contiguous boundaries. Where things
get dicey is in larger bodies of water, especially the Great Lakes. Some of
our group feel that counties on opposite sides of Lake Michigan, for example
are contiguous, and others reject that notion. Here is an excerpt of my most
recent post on the subject:
Quote
....the question of globability (think that word will make the next OED?)
becomes valid, I believe, across very large bodies of water, of which the Great
Lakes are the most obvious. I just had a discussion with another highpointer
who reminded me that state boundaries are clearly demarcated in the Great
Lakes, and by extension, the areas in the lakes must belong to one county or
another. For example, Cook County MN would be globable to Keweenaw County MI,
reinforced by the fact that Isle Royale is in MI, and is not that far from the MN
shore of Cook County. One could make the argument that counties directly
opposite each other on Lake Michigan are globable. Personally, I agree......that
we reach a point at which the "contact" between counties is so tenuous that I
would not be comfortable globbing them. This led me to connect my completed
counties in southern Delmarva from the north, rather than globbing them to
already visited MD/VA counties across Chesapeake Bay.

I remember some time ago that the U.S Government summarily enlarged the total
area of many states by including the previously excluded area of large
internal waters into total state areas. Michigan, for example, gained a huge area
of the Great Lakes, and jumped several notches in state area rankings. What I
don't know is if the new areas were divided up among the counties, or simply
added to the state total as a separate, non-county category. If the
additional area was added to individual counties, then a map must exist showing
counties borders in the Great Lakes, for example. Has anyone ever seen such a map?

I may be able to partially answer my own question. Looking at Delaware
(chosen because it only has three counties and a significant water area) in the
World Almanac, I find a "land area" of 1954 sq. miles, and a "water area" of 536
sq.miles, and "total area" of 2489 sq. miles (off by 1 sq. mile, due to
"rounding"). Adding the individual areas of the three counties gives 2489 sq.
miles, leading to the conclusion that the "water area" is not allocated to any
counties. Maybe someone with more patience than I will check out some of the
Great Lake states to see if their areas are similarly allocated. If major water
areas are not completely allocated to the counties, then some county boundaries
may indeed not touch across some bodies of water, and thus not be globable,
IMO. The waters separating those counties would be a "no man's land" for glob
purposes.
Unquote

Can anyone in this group shed some light on the above?

Thanks, Mike Schwartz