yes the process has been clear since message 9922
the only thing we dont have yet is any confirmation of the
congressional ratification of the final njny agreement
so perhaps the boundary is still legally pending for that reason
but the procedure of plotting & connecting dots that was actually
followed here in 1998 for the new njny
despite frank & utter ignorance of the original fractal njny
boundary of 1834
upon which those dots from the 1857 map were based
etc etc
is exactly what you & others can still only dream of doing with
oktx at the high water line of the red river
even tho you might see that actual line today with your own eyes
& this technical ability gap only further exaggerates the intrinsic
incommensurability of boundary types previously observed
since the new njny in this case is legally a geodetic boundary
while oktx there is legally defined only as a natural or fractal one
now about your ultimate question
i believe this was really the first question to be answered
nj sued ny in 1993 because ny had been acting for long years as
tho it had legal jurisdiction over the whole island
& i believe all this presumptiousness emanated not only from
the state of ny but the county & city of ny as well
depending on what function was involved
so i believe the entire island was totally integrated into ny in every
way
& integrated into nj in no way at all
other than that nj surrounded it
& this total integration into ny is exactly what nj was objecting to
if you are only wanting to see the corporate papers of ny state or
county or city mentioning ellis island
or other legal documentation to this effect
i am pretty sure something like that could be found
& i dont believe there were or could have been any lower level
agreements
since it evidently wasnt a matter of agreement at all beyond 1834
but only of gradual change & a gradually increasing presumption
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Flynn, Kevin"
<flynnk@r...> wrote:
> See this for the process that was used:
>
> http://www.state.nj.us/dep/gis/gisupdate/up1499.pdf
>
> The article was not satisfactory in addressing my ultimate
question: "Is
> Ellis Island a corporate part of NY state wholly surrounded by
NJ, or is it
> simply a part of NJ that is controlled and administered by NY
state through
> an agreement on a lesser level than actual territory of NY
state?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian J. Butler [mailto:bjbutler@b...]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 3:30 PM
> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
>
>
> On Wednesday 07 May 2003 04:57 pm, you wrote:
> So, does the boundary conform to a set of defined corners with
stright line
> segments between them or to the high water mark?
> BJB
>
> > Yes. someone posted an article from a NJ GIS newsletter
and it included a
> > map from the pleadings that showed the NY jurisdictional
boundary... it
> > follows the presumed 1834 low water mark, now on high
ground thanks to the
> > surrounding infill.
> >
> > BTW, I forgot to mention earlier, what I posted is consistent in
fact with
> > the CNN quote; there is no conflict. Most of the current Ellis
Island is
> > reclaimed land and hence NJ, not NY.
> >
> > Again I pose the question, though: Is the NY jurisdiction due
merely to an
> > 18th century practice memorialized in a 19th century compact
allowing NY
> to
> > exercise authority there, or is there some instrument that
actually makes
> > Ellis Island a part of the corporate entity of the state of NY?
It's a
> > subtle difference, but is the island a disconnected piece of
NY state or
> > just a part of NJ that NY owns and governs by lesser
agreement?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian J. Butler [mailto:bjbutler@b...]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 1:51 PM
> > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday 07 May 2003 03:08 pm, you wrote:
> > I thought someone mentioned that this boundary was now
defined by a set of
> > marked corners. If so, I agree that the boundary's length is
measurable,
> > but
> > that is a different problem than we discussed earlier.
> > BJB
> >
> > > Note that I wrote the "original" island which was +/- 3 ac in
size. The
> > > 1834 NY-NJ compact gave NY jurisdiction over land above
the low water
> > > level, while NJ had jurisdiction of all land submerged.
When the US
> Gov't
> > > began filling operations and expanded the size of the
island in the late
> > > 1800s to use it as an immigration center, the seed of the
dispute was
> >
> > sown.
> >
> > > The 1997 SCOTUS decision recognized that in 1834,
expansion of the
> island
> > > was not envisioned; so that the dredging and filling
operations that
> > > followed took place on submerged -- i.e. NJ -- land and
therefore is NJ,
> > > not NY. So the island is split jurisdiction along the 1834 low
water
> mark
> > > -- and despite the earlier arguments about the supposed
impossibility of
> > > measuring a water boundary or other physical boundary,
has in this case
> > > been clearly defined.
> > >
> > > What I want to know and have not yet received a clear
answer is this:
> >
> > Since
> >
> > > the NY-NJ boundary officially runs down the middle of the
Hudson and out
> > > the center of the bay itself, and Ellis and Bedloe's (Liberty)
islands
> > > lie wholly on the NJ side of that centerline, are those
islands that are
> > > under NY jurisdiction merely pieces of NJ that are ruled by
NY, or are
> > > they corporately part of the official lands of the state of NY,
that is,
> > > true outclaves of NY?
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: L. A. Nadybal [mailto:lnadybal@c...]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 6:33 AM
> > > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
> > >
> > >
> > > How does your reply square with what CNN wrote in its
report on the
> > > Supreme Court case from the end of May 03 where it
stated:
> > >
> > > "As a result, most of the island in New York Harbor from
now on must
> > > be considered Ellis Island, New Jersey"?
> > >
> > > I agree the Feds don't have a mini-DC there, but the
Sumpreme Court
> > > only said, apparently, that the Feds don't have the right to
alter the
> > > border of two states at that point. Does the dispute go on?
> > >
> > > LN
> > >
> > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Flynn, Kevin"
<flynnk@r...>
> wrote:
> > > > Ellis Island, while owned by the federal government, is
not federal
> > > > territory with a boundary to be established. The 3-acre +/-
original
> > >
> > > island
> > >
> > > > is NY and the infill surrounding area, and surrounding
waters, is NJ.
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: L. A. Nadybal [mailto:lnadybal@c...]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2003 8:15 PM
> > > > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
> > > >
> > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "acroorca2002"
<orc@o...> wrote:
> > > > > in reply to craig:
> > > > >
> > > > >"it is noteworthy that the ellis island njny loop was
originally
> > > > >fractal but since it is based today on a former rather than
the
> > > > > present shoreline the supreme court adjudicator or
special master
> was
> > > > > forced to rationalize the line into a series of plotted
points"
> > > >
> > > > That wouldn't come into play as an aswer to the question
about
> > > > "interstate" boundaries, because the part of Ellis Island
that is
> > > > federal would make it the second place within the country
that is not
> > > > a part of any state. For that reason, we couldn't consider
the DC-VA
> > > > border in trying to answer the question. There's got to be
a tripoint
> > > > at one place on the perimiter of the federal portion of Ellis
island
> > > > and another at some other location on the perimiter from
which the
> > > > joint border continues anew. NJ-NY will not have a
common border
> > > > where the federal portion interrupts.
> > > >
> > > > And, to close off with the "but..." question? Did the
Supreme Court
> > > > actually say that the plot of federal land on the island is
not part
> > > > of either state or did the court do a "favorite" and leave
things
> > > > ambiguous by saying only that neither state had
jurisdiction?
> > > >
> > > > LN
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > >
> > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
> --
> Brian J. Butler
> BJB Software, Inc.
> 508-429-1441
> bjbutler@b...
> http://www.bjbsoftware.com
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/