Subject: vennbahn<br/>
Date: Jan 29, 2002 @ 01:17<br/>
Author: Brendan Whyte (&quot;Brendan Whyte&quot; &lt;b.whyte@...&gt;)<br/>
Prev&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Next<br/>
<a href="5485.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="5487.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1458068277">I have checked my 1:10,000 topos (Belgian, 43/7 sud). It does appear that <br/>
the road is German, but I am sure this is wrong, as I carefully pored over <br/>
the 1920 official atlas of the Belgo-German boundary, and there are two <br/>
salients of German road into the station area of Monschau station, so that <br/>
only the track width is Belgian here.<br/>
German 1:25,000 maps confirm this.<br/>
Likewise the Belgians show the road at pillar 750 as German, and connecting <br/>
Konzen with Hatzevenn farm, but this is incorrect. In a document I have, <br/>
this road was subsequently made free for German use, to ease the problem of <br/>
the farmers having to travel a long way around to the nearest village. But <br/>
while German maps show the road as Belgian , Belgian maps show it as German. <br/>
I blieve the Belgians are in error, protraying a German right to free <br/>
passage here as full sovereignty. The small round cirle labelled k3 on your <br/>
map is not a pillar on this road, but a kilomtere post: kilometer 3. That is <br/>
why it is a smaller circle symbol than the boundary posts. There are no <br/>
boundary pillars along this road.<br/>
<br/>
I think therefore that the Belghian maps are in error at monschau stztion <br/>
too. There is a German right of free passage over the rails at the level <br/>
crossing here. There are two deep German salients into the station area, to <br/>
ensire the road is German up to the track bed. On 1:50,000 maps like youras, <br/>
this is easily mistakenly drawn as a solid german road, cutting the ilne <br/>
into 2 Belgian tenatcles almost but not quite meeting.<br/>
<br/>
Part of the problem with the Belgian maps is that they use Belgian surveys <br/>
for Belgian territory and German surveys for Gemran teritory. Thus the <br/>
1:10,00 Belgian maps use 1:10,00 0 Belgian surveys for the rila line, but <br/>
enlarged German 1:25,000 surveys for German areas. Naturally, the contours, <br/>
roads etc do not meet up exactly. So it is hard to tell what the true <br/>
situation is on such a thin border.<br/>
German 1:125,000 maps use German surveys entirely.<br/>
<br/>
I think the best source will be the German 1:5,000 maps, although these <br/>
leave Belgian areas blank.<br/>
<br/>
In conclusion: Belgian maps are misstaken. German maps are correct. I think <br/>
this may be because Belgium has been changing the format of its maps in <br/>
recent years, with new styles and specifications, and some information may <br/>
have been inadvertently changed incorrrectly. German maps have had the same <br/>
specs for years. The british &gt;library has a collection of many editions of <br/>
the 1:25,000 German series, on which changes can be traced.<br/>
That, and my understanding of the original treaty, viewing of the treaty <br/>
atlas which was the official basis for the boundary, and subsequent <br/>
agreements for access along Beglian roads, but not new changes in <br/>
sovereignty, have confused the Belgian cartographers IMHO.<br/>
<br/>
I should write to them and ask. Remember how BOTH Belgium and Neth have <br/>
mistakenly drawn several Baarle enclaves. Errors, esp in tiny complicated <br/>
situations like our enclaves, are easy to make, and few except <br/>
compulsive-obsessives like us will pick them up.<br/>
<br/>
BW<br/>
<br/>
_________________________________________________________________<br/>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.">http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.</a></div>