Subject: Re: More lax than US-Canada?<br/>
Date: Dec 08, 2001 @ 10:23<br/>
Author: acroorca2002 (&quot;acroorca2002&quot; &lt;orc@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="4998.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Next&emsp;[<a href="topic3396.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="4998.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="5000.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-944948993">--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., Anton Sherwood &lt;bronto@p...&gt; wrote:<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; acroorca2002 wrote:<br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; but didnt you guys know canada already has 4 territories<br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; yukon nunavut & northwest plus the crown or federal coastal waters<br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; aka territorial seas aka national maritime territory<br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; <br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; which itself comes in 4 separate instalments or areas tho few people<br/>
<br/>
&gt; &gt; can find them all<br/>
<br/>
&gt; <br/>
<br/>
&gt; atlantic, arctic (incl hudson bay), pacific and great lakes?<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>well i am still unsure whether there are any out islands with isolated territorial seas to add to the 4 main territorial seas<br/>
<br/>
but<br/>
<br/>
because the atlantic & arctic including hudson bay etc are apparently all one continuous shape from maine to alaska i would count all that expanse as only one instalment or area of the 4<br/>
<br/>
& since the great lakes arent maritime nor apparently even federal crown waters any longer at all but presumably only provincial crown waters since perhaps 1990 i would not count them as federal territory any longer but pending further clarification just as parts of ontario<br/>
<br/>
so that leaves the pacific to contribute not only the obvious & fairly big one you probably mean extending from alaska to point roberts but also 2 other & much smaller pockets that are perhaps not so easy to find or recognize as such<br/>
<br/>
m</div>