So please bear with me while I summarise some of the
input I have received from this wonderfully interesting group of people, whom I
am glad to have discovered :), and apply some more of my own
thinking:
We are used to thinking of borders being described in two
dimensions and then extrapolating the information into the third, vertical,
dimension by projection to the centre of the earth in one direction and outwards
to the boundaries of the troposphere (or whichever layer it is) but, as this
discussion involving Vertical Differentiation of Sovereignty (VDoS) has showed,
this simplistic approach does not always work. Nevertheless in the vast majority
of cases it does.
In the cases where we need to think explicitly in three
dimensions we obviously need to start from the wording of any applicable
treaties in order to establish the de jure situation. By the sound of
it that is clear in the case of the MXUS bridges where VDoS is relevant
(although this still might not distinguish between tubes and shells, per LN's
analysis). It sounds as though it was also well defined in the case of West
Berlin (possibly the best such defined case - of necessity given the tensions
involved between the parties), thereby removing the exclave status of most of
West Berlin while the air corridor treaty was in effect (the exceptions being
those parts not contiguous at ground level with the main part of Western
Sector). However it also sounds as though the de jure situation in
the case of the Vennbahn may be ill defined unless the type of questions LN asks
are actually covered explicitly in the treaty (where can we get a copy of the
treaty?) or in subsequent rulings by courts or tribunals with legal competency
establishing case law. If there are no such subsequent case law rulings then it
becomes purely a matter of academic interest and curiosity until an issue arises
that demands a ruling. I suppose that discussion on this list does not
constitute such an issue :(
Since LN has had no success in obtaining further insight
from local sources (direct evidence supporting Jesper's first law) it seems
likely that there have not been such issues demanding judicial resolution, and
so we have to look at the de facto situation as a fall back position.
This is not likely to answer every question since it is driven by practical
needs not by academic theorising. So what kind of evidence can we hope to find
to determine answers de facto?
I think that examining the actual passage of traffic and
the acts of maintenance performed on roads, bridges etc. (who does them, who
pays for them, etc.) would provide the best such evidence in the case of
bridges. In the case of other subterranean questions I suppose one can only
obtain evidence if there are mines, oil or gas deposits, etc. that lie
under the territory in question. I fear that this approach might also provide
contradictory evidence when looking at the passage of traffic, maintenance etc.
at level crossings and stations in contrast to bridges - but that is
mere speculation of course. In a small way, to this end, I plan to
visit the area on September 14th and see what observations I can make on the
ground. I won't have time to visit municipal offices to try and get answers to
some of the questions ( I can only spare an hour or two at the most in the
area) so this will be purely a field trip but hopefully it will,
nevertheless, be instructive. If anyone cares to join me on that day I shall, of
course, be delighted to meet you and make a joint study :) - please drop me a
line if you are interested.
In preparation for this I have managed to obtain 1:25000
topographical maps of the area from which I observe the following
(notwithstanding Jesper's third law):
Working from South to North (all coordinates using WGS84
datum):
1) Ruitzhof - there appears to be only one road crossing
and this looks to be at grade (50°31.267'N, 6°12.392'E) and so the exclave
status here seems assured
2) Mützenich - there are numerous bridge crossings - road
passing under the railway at 50°32.361'N, 6°11.890'E, 50°33.343'N, 6°13.118'E
(athough the map is unclear here) and at 50°33.762'N, 6°13.715'E, and
over the railway at 50°32.787'N, 6°12.444'E (this is interesting since the road
emanates from the Mützenich side and ends immediately on reaching
the other side of the railway), 50°33.286'N, 6°12.665'E, 50°33.286'N,
6°13.424'E, 50°33.307'N, 6°13.500'E (these last two lead nowhere useful on the
mainland side - they do not connect with the general road system), and
50°33.762'N, 6°13.719'E - so the exclave status here is in
question
3) Aderich farm - this is quite separated from the
"mainland" by both the railway AND a road - definitely an
exclave
4) Roetgen/Lammersdorf - most crossings are at grade but
the road appears to pass under the railway at 50°38.404'N, 6°11.211'E and
50°38.661'N, 6°11.025'E (outskirts of Roetgen) - exclave status in
question
5) Roetgen (north) - all crossings appear to be at grade
although the map is unclear in the area between this and the section to the
south (Jesper's third law again!!) - exclave status likely to be
confirmed
I also noticed (separate phenomenon from exclaves but same
locality) while looking here that there appears to be another example of a
national road that passes through another country without connecting to that
country's road system (similar to where the B258 crosses into Belgium between
Fringshaus and Entenpful). The German road L106 passes into Belgium just south
of Aderich (at 50°35.396'N, 6°14.566'E) and re-enters Germany at 50°35.274'N,
6°14.314'E - covering a distance of about 530m inside Belgium - there are also a
couple of minor roads that connect with this Belgian section, one of which
leaves/enters Germany at 50°35.583'N, 6°14.721'E (where it joins the L 106) and
another at 50°35.303'N, 6°14.175'E - none of these being connected to the rest
of the Belgian road system.
Lots to look at on September 14th :)
Cheers
Hugh
Nobody I've ever contacted in towns in the area knows.
The treaty
says the track bed - how deep does that go? To a depth
immediately
below the rocks laying on the dirt over which the rails are
laid? Or
to a depth to bottoms of the drainage pipes belonging to the
railroad?
Or, to the bottom of the arch over which the tracks pass.
Or, to the
upper surface of the road bed under the bridge? Or to a
point in
between - like truck height - so that a truck on the road
doesn't
violate Belgian airspace? (After all, a truck loaded with
cigarettes
on the back that crosses the border without declaring the cargo
for
tax and customs duty, would be a smuggler, no?) If the road
directly
underneath the bridge is German, the border had to make a
deviation
from descending vertically at some point. If the bottom of
the road
bed under the tunnel is the depth at which the ground becomes
Belgian
again as we descend, then the German road forms a tunnel
of
sovereignty connecting the two pieces of Germany on the W & E sides
of
the railroad tracks. Of course, if below the road, to the middle
of
the earth (or beyond) the soil remains German, then, there is
no
"tube" or tunnel of German sovereignty, only a "shell" or cover
of
Belgian sovereignty on top of all that German land.
What a
picture.
We had tubes of sovereignty in the form of the allied air
access
routes over E Germany to W. Berlin... by treaty, they had a width,
a
minimum altitude and a maximum altitude, beyond which the the
allies
had no rights. The western powers had no rights of access to
planes
that crashed on the ground, because to get to the ground, they had
to
leave the corridor.
Regards
LN
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Jesper
Nielsen" <jesniel@i...>
wrote:
> So when does the border change
direction? The air below the bridge
or at the
> bridge?
>
>
>
> Jesper
>
>
>
> _____
>
> Fra:
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com]
På
> vegne af L. A. Nadybal
> Sendt: 30. august 2005 03:49
>
Til: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Emne: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Where is
this German exclave in Belgium?
>
>
>
> This
goes back to the discussions we had earlier this year about
>
sovereignty always or not always being vertical, extending to the
>
heavens and to the center of the earth. See the photo library
and
> past messages - there is a diagram there getting to the heart of
what
> is included in the "track bed". This concept of
interrupted
> verticality of borders existed at Steinstuecken (where
there was a W
> German bridge over E German RR tracks inside the W
Berlin exclave),
> still exists on the bridges over the US-Mexico
border, and on the
> bridge crossing the D-Luxembourg
condominium.
> LN
>
>
> --- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Hugh Wallis" <hugh@o...> wrote:
>
> I wish I had been there :) Do you remember exactly where on the
>
railway line
> > that bridge lies?
> >
> >
The reason this picture interests me so much is that it has raised a
>
> question in my mind about the exclave status of the parcel of
land
> connected
> > to "the mainland" by the road under the
bridge. Without access to
> the legal
> > documents and only
being able to go on what I find on websites it is
> hard to
> >
be certain but here is the thinking:
> .
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> YAHOO!
GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>
>
* Visit your group "BoundaryPoint
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BoundaryPoint>
" on the web.
>
> * To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>
BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
<mailto:BoundaryPoint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> * Your use of
Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
Terms of Service.
>
>
>
>
_____