all the right stuff lowell
& especially great news to find we will need another of our famous
tripointing stitches here
an eventuality which we knew was always hanging in the analysis
but this is practically proof of it
however
we still dont know which direction the stitch will run in
& therefore wont know where the tripoint position falls
til we learn precisely what is meant by the south bank for mdwv
& til we see the 1927 mathews & nelson map for mdva
for they themselves may have foreseen & included part or all of this
stitch
or incorporated it in their own terminal mdva reach
when they realized the final headland they were sighting against was
not on the va bank at all
but on the irrelevant wv bank
etc
but in any case
that final map of theirs is probably indispensable for making mdvawv
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus"
<mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> I, too, have been doing more thinking about the Potomac
boundaries. I've also
> been doing research.
>
> The charter granted to Lord Baltimore made Maryland extend "unto
the further
> bank" of the Potomac River, that being the Virginia side. The MDVA
boundary did
> not become the low-water mark until 1879, long after the District
of Columbia
> and West Virginia had taken their form and being. This accounts
for the
> differences between the MDWV, MDVA, and DCVA boundaries.
>
> The circumstances of the 1879 revision of MDVA are these: The two
states
> jointly agreed in 1874 to submit their boundary problems (mainly in
the
> Chesapeake Bay area and the wide tidal estuary of the Potomac) to
arbitrators
> and to be bound thereby. The arbitrators spoke in 1877, applying
the doctrine
> of prescription to move the boundary to the low-water mark, because
Virginians
> had always used the land exposed during low water as their own.
The decision
> was accepted by both states and ratified by the Congress in 1879.
In doing so,
> the Congress specifically disclaimed any application thereof to the
District of
> Columbia.
>
> It was this same arbitration that determined that the low-water
mark should be
> measured "without considering arms, inlets, creeks, or affluents as
parts of the
> river, but measuring the shore from headland to headland." In
1927, the two
> states agreed that their respective state geologists (Edward B.
Mathews and
> Wilbur A. Nelson) should designate the headlands from which
straight lines
> should be drawn. This was done in 1927 and shown as red lines on a
series of
> six maps, accepted by Virginia in 1928 and by Maryland in 1929.
Thus, it is not
> left of any of us moderns to shoot any headlands. (I find the
Mathews-Nelson
> report cataloged in several libraries in the region and one in
Tulsa!)
>
> Note that none of this low-water and headland business affects
MDWV! That line
> is governed by Lord Baltimore's charter. When the Supremes
directed the
> resurvey of the north-south MDWV line at the western end of
Maryland in 1910,
> they had the initial point established at the SOUTH BANK of one of
the heads of
> the Potomac.
>
> Thus, the MDWV line follows the south bank of Lord Baltimore's
river downstream
> to the VAWV boundary. Meanwhile, the MDVA boundary is ascending
the same river
> along the low-water mark. Regardless of how one might construe the
stitch to
> connect the two, the tripoint has to be at the intersection of the
newly refined
> VAWV land boundary and the south bank of the Potomac.
>
> Lowell G. McManus
> Leesville, Louisiana, USA
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "m06079" <barbaria_longa@h...>
> To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 11:31 AM
> Subject: [BoundaryPoint] more thinking about mdvawv
>
>
> > dickson tn
> >
> > played with the full deck on route 52 from elgin to orlinda
> > & got a wave from a joker who was just sitting there at the end
> >
> > also
> > devised a completely new approach to the mdvawv conundrum
> >
> > & will be kicked off this computer in a few minutes
> >
> > but here it is in brief
> >
> >
> > of course there is still the purely technical loose end of
recovering
> > marker 29a on the south side of the highway
> > just for maximum possible sighting accuracy
> >
> > not that i doubt the plat nor my ability to read it mind you
> > since there is perfect agreement with the folkloric tripoint
position
> > on the flat rock
> > as reported by brian
> >
> > but the only remaining hard question is
> > how to determine the correct low water mark for the mdva & mdwv
> > vectors
> > which is the crosshair position on our vawv line of sight
> >
> >
> > but first
> > a breakthru discovery
> > on bus&ss76 p91 under dc it says mdva does not follow the
meanderings
> > of the river but runs from headland to headland
> > yikes
> >
> > & presumably this principle also applies equally to mdwv
> >
> > all in the absence of specific judicial comment of course
> >
> > but when the courts had to determine this same low water line on
dcva
> > do you know what they did
> >
> > they changed it to the freakin high water mark
> > also p91
> > i kid you not
> >
> > so tho this dcva decision is neither dispositive nor even
necessarily
> > suggestive of how mdva & mdwv might be resolved
> > i think it does argue for not just any low water line but rather
for
> > at least as high a low water line as one could possibly construe
> >
> >
> > & curiously too
> > there is that mdva drinking straw case currently being decided by
the
> > supremes
> > which may even force them to elucidate this state line more
clearly
> > just in the nick of time & as if just for us
> >
> > but in the meantime
> > my considered guess is neither lowest nor mean but highest low
water
> >
> > & we do have available for this very purpose that hydrographic
> > webpage with the green light that turns red just at zero stage
> > you may recall
> >
> > so i would pick that moment of zero stage to take the reading
> > from headland to headland
> >
> >
> > btw the day i tried mdvawv that gauge was 3 feet 7 inches
> >
> > & the flat rock was at or just below the surface at that stage
> >
> > which suggests it may not be the true tripoint position at all but
> > just a point on vawv some distance shy of mdvawv
> > even by my own conservative reckoning
> >
> >
> > but i suppose the real trick will be shooting the headlands
> > at whatever stage
> > given all the scattered boulders
> > yikes
> >
> > this isnt getting any easier
> >
> > but i do think it is at least getting clearer
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >