If I understand correctly (of which I am not certain) the north-south line across the island is the BGTR boundary. If the tripoint is in the channel south of the island, perhaps the visible east-west line on the island is a cadastral boundary. Even though there seem to be problems with the map, the satellite image does not lie. Is that an old Soviet map?

Lowell G. McManus
Leesville, Louisiana, USA

----- Original Message -----

From: Jesper Nielsen

To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 2:01 AM

Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] GSEEBE: BGGRTR

Hm.... Interesting.

But what explains the visible border lines on the satellite image?

Was the border redrawn?

Jesper

----- Original Message -----

From: aletheia kallos

To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 3:54 AM

Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] GSEEBE: BGGRTR

yikes i dont believe you will be bored in any case but you must read page 7 of the study that goes with your ibs map http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/LimitsinSeas/IBS041.pdf it says in contradiction of your detail map swatch that the tripoint is not at marker 1 but actually in the river some 196point9 feet due south of marker 1 so dont forget to bring a tape measure & compass & inner tube it also suggests marker 320n may have been the original bgtr marker 320 for which please also see both ibs studies below with the n perhaps just added for north bank at the time when indirect marker mate 320a was added on the south bank & the third indirect or witness marker grtr number 1 was added on the island no explanation for 320b & 320e tho except that intervisibility is mentioned as a feature of both bgtr & bggr in the ibs studies so that could be why both of these are there the peculiar marker numbering sequence up to 320 is from the bgtr demarcation of 1921 mentioned on pages 2 & 8 & 10 & 11 of http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/Limitsinseas/IBS049.pdf also with a map this demarcation originally continued with marker number 321 & well beyond indeed some 77 km up the maritsa from this island along what is now the bggr border as mentioned on page 12 of http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/LimitsinSeas/IBS056.pdf but was foreshortened by the subsequent insertion of the tripoint position near this island in 1926 along with the marker insertions all of the insertions evidently fall between markers 320 & 321 of the original bgtr demarcation & they are evidently joined on bggr by as many as 186 other insertions also somehow numbered between 320 & 321 however improbably all per the above links --- Jesper Nielsen <jesniel@...> wrote: > Attached closeup of tp topomap + satellite image. > (The satellite image was provided to me by recent > Turkish BP member, thanks). > > Looking in regular road maps this looked like a > "boring" wet tripoint, but is now for me a expected > highlight on GSEEBE. > > Note how the three borders are visible on the > satellite image. > > The system of markers with nos 320 is not clear to > me. First I though A-B-E-N had to do with cyrillic > alphabet, but probably not > (http://www.inp.nsk.su/~bolkhov/files/fonts/cyr-rfx/sshots/mac-cyrillic.gif). > And why does 320A appear to be on the GRTR line? No > 1 most be on the GRTR line as per this map: > http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/collection/LimitsinSeas/maps/bs41a.php > > Perhaps we will have more information in May. > > Jesper > > > ATTACHMENT part 2 image/jpeg name=K-35-077-4 (KAPITAN-ANDREEVO, 1978).jpg > ATTACHMENT part 3 image/jpeg name=bggrtr_sat.jpg __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com