thanx roger
& thats a great site you have there too
i would only add about nmoktx that it is indeed much
closer to the 103rd meridian than txnw is
& may well have been intended to fall precisely on
that meridian
yet the tripoint as we know it still falls west of
longitude 103
i believe
by about 8 seconds
or several hundred feet
also
back to the supposedly meridional nmtx sector
any apparent 2 or 3 minute westward drift in many 19th
century survey lines such as this one was owing more
to the use of the similarly offset washington meridian
on which they were based than to any survey error
survey error by that period was usually measurable in
seconds rather than minutes
just as the abovementioned drift of meridional nmok
actually is
& about these nmtx follies generally
of course all our state line imbroglios are even more
ridiculous than the international ones
but it is nice to see something as real as hydraulics
underlying at least one of these too
for your links do clearly identify water as the
madness behind the method in this case as well
funniest & craziest of all tho is the fact that if nm
ever were to prevail legally about some historical
shift of the rio grande determining who other than
texas really owns el paso
well in that case el paso would revert not to new
mexico at all but to chihuahua
only if the 32nd parallel sector of nmtx westward of
longitude 103 were adjusted much farther to the south
for which there is no possible reason nor even any
cockamamie excuse
could el paso fall into a thereby enlarged new mexico
so the more you look at this one
the more hilarious it only gets
but your site reminds me to ask you &or any other
highpointers whether you have any news
or any data at all for that matter
on any country highpoints that may also serve
simultaneously as tricountry points
we are aware of numerous tricountry points that are
situated on summits of locally supreme peaks
but have not yet been able to establish which if any
of these might also be a highpoint of a country
--- Roger_Rowlett <
roger.rowlett@...>
wrote:
>
> I have an article with several links on my
> americasroof blog on this:
>
http://americasroof.com/wp/archives/2005/03/13/new-mexico-sues-texas/
>
> The upshot is that New Mexico's own fiscal analysis
> of this bill to
> claim land 3 miles east of the current border to the
> 103rd meridian
> would probably be considered frivolous since the
> Courts have ruled
> that if a state border goes unchallenged for "a long
> course of years"
> then it becomes the defacto border. Texas permitted
> New Mexico to
> enter the Union in 1912 on condition of dropping the
> claim.
> Ironically though the Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas
> tripoint jogs in to
> the meridian.
>
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G.
> McManus"
> <mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> > The Commissioner of the General Land Office of the
> State of Texas
> has proposed a
> > "free-for-all brawl" between the Senates of the
> two states over the
> lost land
> > that New Mexico is griping about.
> >
> > See the third of three subtopics in the article at
> > http://tinyurl.com/6mb7d .
> >
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
>
>
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/