yes beautiful thanx again
understood
& i can read most romance with a dictionary & instinct
both of which together tell me about alveo that it is basically just
the spanish word for thalweg
nothing fancy or mysterious here i think
so yes i could not have been counting this condo in my census
therefore unless the lost condo of my mind ever is found to exist
our world appears to have no more than 7 condominial territories
of which 1 is tridominial
all as originally lassooed far below in this thread
except of course that eshoni is fips
doh
when i should have said hnnisv in proper iso
& thanx for bearing with me on this
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Kaufman"
<mikekaufman79@y...> wrote:
> Rereading my post, the translation might lead to a little confusion
> here. To clear it up: I think the author suggests two things: 1.
> the waters can adapt to Article XXI and be under the rule of
Alveo.
> 2. there can be a condominium.
>
> -Mike K.
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Michael Kaufman
> <mikekaufman79@y...> wrote:
> > Yes - that's why I said the "suggested BR-UY condo."
> >
> > Part 7 of this study is pretty much the author's view
> > on what should/could be done to resolve the conflict.
> > His idea is shown in the map in that section,
> > including the community of waters ("comunidade das
> > aguas Brasil/Uruguai" in Portuguese). So here he is
> > suggesting a condominium. In English below is the
> > translation of the last paragraph of Part 7
> > (Las...terrestre):
> >
> > "The waters to the south of Isla Brasilera, in
> > agreement established in the Juridical Statute - 1933,
> > in its Article XXI, are waters in the rule/government
> > of "Alveo" (= Mother of the River), or it (can
> > possibly) be a community of waters in which the
> > jurisdiction of each (country) of the river bank
> > reaches up to the opposite river bank but without
> > reaching/overtaking its (the other country's)
> > terrestrial/land part."
> >
> > What's interesting is this Article XXI which claims
> > the waters are under the jurisdiction of the "Mother
> > of the River." I did not see any reference to this
> > anywhere else in the document. Maybe a potential
> > enclave of Everyone's Land? :)
> >
> > -Mike K.
> >
> > --- acroorca2002 <orc@o...> wrote:
> > > i think thats a disputed ownership there tho mike
> > > rather than any kind of joint ownership
> > >
> > > & i may have just been imagining this last one too
> > >
> > > so really
> > > to have maybe 5 or 7 is practically as good as
> > > having maybe 6 or 8
> > >
> > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael
> > > Kaufman"
> > > <mikekaufman79@y...> wrote:
> > > > Mike - I think you must be recalling the suggested
> > > BR-UY condo
> > > shown
> > > > here in the bottom image:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.info.lncc.br/wrmkkk/uilhabe.html
> > > >
> > > > Isla Brasilera is still disputed BR-UY.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com,
> > > "acroorca2002" <orc@o...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > indio ca
> > > > >
> > > > > renewed thanx & bravos peter for this stunningly
> > > punctilious
> > > > analysis
> > > > >
> > > > > so i guess we can say there is a probable or a
> > > putative cnkp condo
> > > > >
> > > > > & i think you have nailed its topology as well
> > > as possible for now
> > > > >
> > > > > & overnight i may also have recalled a possible
> > > 6th or 8th member
> > > > of
> > > > > this elite little list of international condos
> > > as begun below
> > > > >
> > > > > or perhaps there is a whole new constellation of
> > > them in this new
> > > > case
> > > > > i forget
> > > > > was it a riverine archipelago or something on
> > > aruy or arpa or arbr
> > > > > dang
> > > > > i can never keep them straight anyway
> > > > >
> > > > > but can anyone remind me if this is real
> > > > > or what is what in this last case too
> > > > > just to complete the probable global condo list
> > > > > since or rather if we really can now
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > talking of co tho
> > > > > myself i actually woke up in coachella this
> > > morning
> > > > > which comes just before coalinga & coarsegold in
> > > the california
> > > > index
> > > > > before realizing the last full service
> > > laundromat before the
> > > > > wilderness was back here in eendio
> > > > > whoops
> > > > > so it is back 3 spaces again
> > > > > plus a carwash & insurance payment etc etc
> > > > > & i will at least blend into the woodwork a
> > > little better now
> > > > > a matter of no little importance btw
> > > > > here in the land of the free & home of the brave
> > > > >
> > > > > but having nailed continental & dry caw
> > > > > & also cas
> > > > > & incidentally a few of californias other
> > > corners too
> > > > > as well as possible on previous tries
> > > > > & while still puzzling over the exact location
> > > of the elusive can
> > > > > i have determined to make a try for cae in the
> > > meantime
> > > > > so as to prepare the way for completing a first
> > > known news tour
> > > of
> > > > > the cardinal extremities of california
> > > > > as soon as future research will enable such a
> > > culmination
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Peter
> > > Smaardijk"
> > > > > <smaardijk@y...> wrote:
> > > > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Peter
> > > Smaardijk"
> > > > > > <smaardijk@y...> wrote:
> > > > > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com,
> > > "m06079"
> > > > > > <barbaria_longa@h...>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > & thanx again peter now that i have really
> > > studied &
> > > > > appreciated
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > seamless text
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > but as you indicated
> > > > > > > > there still seems to be some question
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > first they talk about a cnkp joint area
> > > > > > > > but then they talk about a tripoint
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > & we know from the trilines of the delu
> > > condo areas
> > > > > > > > that there would be no single tricountry
> > > point
> > > > > > > > but a tricountry line with 2 bidominial
> > > tricountry points
> > > at
> > > > > its
> > > > > > > ends
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > nor could i find the mentioned monument
> > > numbers on this
> > > > > probably
> > > > > > > > older map
> > > > > > > > & thus still cant visualize what the condo
> > > area might look
> > > > like
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > any ideas
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > nevertheless
> > > > > > > > there certainly appears to be reason to
> > > hope this is a real
> > > > deal
> > > > > > > > if i am not mistaken
> > > > > > > > our fifth or seventh in this rare
> > > international condo
> > > category
> > > > > > > > together with
> > > > > > > > 2 delu
> > > > > > > > 2 esfr
> > > > > > > > aeom &
> > > > > > > > eshoni
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The treaty deals with "the" tripoint, not
> > > with the
> > > condominium,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > although I can see that you can't really
> > > deal with the
> > > tripoint
> > > > > > > without taking into account the condominium,
> > > the problem
> > > seems
> > > > to
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > that the condominium isn't very well - if at
> > > all - described.
> > > > So
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > only thing we can assume is that the
> > > condominium exists. The
> > > > only
> > > > > > > point that can be located with certainty in
> > > that case is
> > > (CNKP)
> > > > > > KPRU.
> > > > > > > The line described in the agreement, which
> > > marks the end of
> > > the
> > > > > > > condominium, looks like to be only
> > > instrumental in defining
> > > > this
> > > > > > > point (where it crosses the other line - the
> > > thalweg KPRU
> > > > > > boundary).
> > > > > > > I agree that (CNKP)KPRU is only half of the
> > > story, but it
> > > looks
> > > > > > like
> > > > > > > being the maximum attainable here. I suspect
> > > that the treaty
> > > > was
> > > > > > more
> > > > > > > important to Russia than to the other two
> > > countries: Russia
> > > > > closed
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > gap in its border. The gap consisted of 1)
> > > the last stretch
> > > of
> > > > > KPRU
> > > > > > > between KPRU marker pair no. 1 and
> > > (CNKP)KPRU and 2) the
> > > (CNKP)
> > > > RU
> > > > > > > border between (CNKP)KPRU and CNRU marker
> > > no. 423.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Whether that last marker is the other
> > > tripoint, CN(CNKP)RU,
> > > > > remains
> > > > > > > an open question. If the condominium border
> > > follows the river
> > > > > bank,
> > > > > > > it can't be, unless the marker is on the
> > > very edge of the
> > > land
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > half in the river. But I don't believe that
> > > is the case.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Peter S.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In http://www.pnp.ru/pg_nomers/20865.htm
> > > (Parlamentskaja
> > > gazeta),
> > > > > it
> > > > > > is mentioned that a draft "additional
> > > protocol-description" of
> > > > the
> > > > > > CNRU border, eastern section, is approved by
> > > the Russian
> > > > > government.
> > > > > > It deals with CNRU in between CNRU marker no.
> > > 423 and the newly
> > > > > > established tripoint (by the tripartite
> > > agreement). There is no
> > > > > talk
> > > > > > of the condominium whatsoever here, and the
> > > protocol is
> > > presented
> > > > > by
> > > > > > the head of the Russian delegation to the
> > > joint Russian-Chinese
> > > > > > demarcation commission, so no mention of
> > > Koreans here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This official, Genrich Kireev, says that the
> > > aim of the
> > > > additional
> > > > > > protocol-description was to describe in
> > > detail, including the
> > > > exact
> > > > > > co-oordinates, the location of the tripoint.
> > > "(...) the
> > > tripoint
> > > > is
> > > > > > located in the middle of the main channel of
> > > the Tumannaja
> > > river,
> > > > > > 306,9 m. from boundary marker no. 423".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Real information on the condominium is
> > > probably only available
> > > in
> > > > > > Chinese sources. Or someone could browse
> > > through all .kp
> > > websites
> > > > > on
> > > > > > the internet :-))
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Peter S.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
> > http://companion.yahoo.com/