Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: rwtzug question

Expand Messages
  • aletheiak
    & that was so much fun i would now add in morning light about that extremest of ibs generated positions shown by the pushpin on the satpic attachment below the
    Message 1 of 6 , May 1, 2010
      & that was so much fun i would now add in morning light

      about that extremest of ibs generated positions shown by the pushpin on the satpic attachment below the island

      clearly the ibs is mistaken to believe the thalweg of the tiny kagitumba could ever reach the midstream of the broad kagera under any circumstances

      indeed only below the thalweg junction could it ever hope to do so
      or be said to do so in any sense

      & if thats their idea of a tripoint
      which in fact they assert 3 or more times in all 3 numbers 54 55 & 69
      then they must be nuts
      even without the help of my extreme reading

      they acknowledge yet appear to somehow dismiss the 1934 begb agreement that changed the present rwtz convergent from median to thalweg

      so i assume it is this agreement that caused brownlie & or our brownlie rwtzug notes to conclude thalweg junction
      no muss no fuss

      & i will continue to assume that is correct
      even without a close rereading of brownlie

      & i would also add
      i wouldnt necessarily agree that you can never get a good read on a thalweg in a satpic

      --- In boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com, aletheia kallos <aletheiak@...> wrote:
      >
      > thanx i needed that
      >
      > it matters if youd like to know if the tripoint is really definite & trilaterally agreedor only imaginary & irrational
      > & it matters if you are really wanting & really trying to search for & discover & ultimately reach the true tripointspelled p o i n twhether actually or virtuallyto the limits of possibility
      > but now that i can finally see the confluence at google earthfor which thank you very much indeedi am attaching my best guess at the thalweg junction positionbased on surface appearance & direction of flow
      > this would be the perfectly definite tripoint if our brownlie notes are right & the ibs wrong
      > & i also see now btw that the ibru boundary rivers database agrees with us & disagrees with the ibs
      > & there does appear to have been a change of rwtz in 1934 from midstream to thalwegwhich is probably the cause of the confusion& it is mentioned & considered only in ibs 69 & not 54 or 55
      > but back to the chaserwanda seems to get a long finger of kagera river bed in any case far below the actual mouth of the kagitumbabefore you finally reach a thalweg junction tripoint
      > & if the ibs is right then it very much appears the tripoint is several hundred meters even farther downstreamperhaps around the next bend or even beyond the islandwhich could in that case conceivably belong to rwandayikes but an admittedly etxremist viewas the long finger necessarily grows even longer to that ridiculously full extentbefore the median of the kagera ever reaches what is left of the thalweg of the kagitumbaor the combined kagitumba kagera thalweg 
      > but most importantly it matters at least to mebecause it is such extreme fun to consider & tryeven long before anyone paddles thru the crocodiles there in a dugout canoe
      > --- On Fri, 4/30/10, Jesper <jesper@...> wrote:
      >
      > From: Jesper <jesper@...>
      > Subject: [boundarypointpoint] Re: rwtzug question
      > To: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Friday, April 30, 2010, 7:51 AM
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >  
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Not sure why this matters. It's somewhere in the river and you cannot figure out the thalweg when you are off site.
      >
      >
      >
      > Funny you should ask about the tp - Google Earth has just updated its image of the location.
      >
      >
      >
      > Jesper
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In boundarypointpoint@ yahoogroups. com, aletheia kallos <aletheiak@ ..> wrote:
      >
      > >
      >
      > > our old notes say brownlie indicates this tripoint is at the thalweg
      >
      > > junction of the kagera & kagitumba
      >
      > > http://www.nicolett e.dk/diverse/ african_tripoint s.htm#rwtzug
      >
      > >
      >
      > > but the notes could be wrong because all 3 relevant ibs studies
      >
      > > http://www.law. fsu.edu/library/ collection/ LimitsinSeas/ IBS054.pdf
      >
      > > <goog_65133878>
      >
      > > http://www.law. fsu.edu/library/ collection/ LimitsinSeas/ IBS055.pdf
      >
      > > <goog_65133880>
      >
      > > http://www.law. fsu.edu/library/ collection/ LimitsinSeas/ IBS069.pdf
      >
      > > say the tripoint is at the junction of the midstream of the kagera & the
      >
      > > thalweg of the kagitumba
      >
      > >
      >
      > > this is apparently because they cite evidence indicating rwtz follows the
      >
      > > midstream of the upper kagera
      >
      > > tho they do agree tzug follows the thalweg of the lower kagera
      >
      > > & rwug the thalweg of the kagitumba
      >
      > >
      >
      > > so my question for anyone who has access to a copy of brownlie is
      >
      > > does he actually say anything explicitly about the location of this tripoint
      >
      > > & if not
      >
      > > then does he place rwtz on the midstream of the kagera or on the thalweg of
      >
      > > the kagera
      >
      > > & based on what evidence does he do so
      >
      > >
      >
      > > topo
      >
      > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/boundarypo intpoint/ attachments/ folder/109647090 8/item/113410272 7/view?<http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/boundarypo intpoint/ attachments/ folder/109647090 8/item/113410272 7/view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order= ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc>
      >
      > > picmode=original& mode=tn&order= ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc<http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/boundarypo intpoint/ attachments/ folder/109647090 8/item/113410272 7/view?picmode= original& mode=tn&order= ordinal&start= 1&dir=asc>
      >
      > >
      >
      > >
      >
      > > note that the truth appears to be that if a boundary trijunction occurs in a
      >
      > > river confluence & the three convergent boundaries are not unanimous in
      >
      > > following either the thalweg or the midstream
      >
      > > then the tripoint must actually be indefinite or irrational
      >
      > >
      >
      > > but i am still hoping to get a better grasp of the facts before concluding
      >
      > > anything about this one
      >
      > >
      >
    • Jesper Nielsen
      All three border articles in Brownlie talks about thalwegs and quoted documents also say thalwegs. BWNAZMZW have an issue of non aligned river border. ZAZM is
      Message 2 of 6 , May 2, 2010

        All three border articles in Brownlie talks about thalwegs and quoted documents also say thalwegs.

         

        BWNAZMZW have an issue of non aligned river border. ZAZM is midstream, while NAZM is thalweg.

         

        But any river border works very well until somebody starts questioning the true alignment and whether the border is frozen in time.

         

        But any tripoint where there is no tripartity agreement is bound to fail.

         

        Jesper

         


        Fra: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com ] På vegne af aletheia kallos
        Sendt: 22. april 2010 00:27
        Til: boundarypointpoint@yahoogroups.com
        Emne: [boundarypointpoint] rwtzug question

         

         

        our old notes say brownlie indicates this tripoint is at the thalweg junction of the kagera & kagitumba

         

        but the notes could be wrong because all 3 relevant ibs studies 

        say the tripoint is at the junction of the midstream of the kagera & the thalweg of the kagitumba

         

        this is apparently because they cite evidence indicating rwtz follows the midstream of the upper kagera

        tho they do agree tzug follows the thalweg of the lower kagera

        & rwug the thalweg of the kagitumba

         

        so my question for anyone who has access to a copy of brownlie is

        does he actually say anything explicitly about the location of this tripoint

        & if not

        then does he place rwtz on the midstream of the kagera or on the thalweg of the kagera 

        & based on what evidence does he do so

         

        topo

         

        note that the truth appears to be that if a boundary trijunction occurs in a river confluence & the three convergent boundaries are not unanimous in following either the thalweg or the midstream

        then the tripoint must actually be indefinite or irrational

         

        but i am still hoping to get a better grasp of the facts before concluding anything about this one

         

         

         

         

      • aletheia kallos
        All three border articles in Brownlie talks about thalwegs and quoted documents also say thalwegs. greatthanxit reaffirms my conclusion that the state
        Message 3 of 6 , May 2, 2010
          All three border articles in Brownlie talks about thalwegs and quoted documents also say thalwegs.

          great
          thanx
          it reaffirms my conclusion that the state department simply blew this one 
          in triplicate



          BWNAZMZW have an issue of non aligned river border. ZAZM is midstream, while NAZM is thalweg.

          right tho in that case the fact that zmzw is midstream & nazm is thalweg may be trumped by the overlap or kiss of namibia & zimbabwe we have observed on the best topos

          there would be a problem getting the bwzw hunters road projection to have any effect on zambia for closing zmzw 
          or the bwna chobe thalweg to have any effect on zimbabwe for closing bwzw
          etc

          & at some point everyone would have to come to terms with the fact that a tiny scrap of the same land has been dealt to both namibia & zimbabwe by the colonial masters of botswana
          & therefore that a tiny nazw boundary remains to be delimited or a tiny nazw condo acknowledged

          but it isnt clear yet what the difference between thalweg & median in that situation will really mean since there are so many different probabilities that might intervene



          But any river border works very well until somebody starts questioning the true alignment and whether the border is frozen in time.

          right but they only start questioning because some practical problem has arisen

          we trypointers by contrast are questioning the true alignments all the time



          But any tripoint where there is no tripartity agreement is bound to fail.

          yes fail in some sense

          charney with colson & smith distinguishes actual tripoints from potential tripoints

          only actual ones have trilateral agreements

          & the potential ones may be either presumed or probable or uncertain or conflicting

          the purview of their book is maritime but the possibilities appear to be the same with land boundaries

          i would call most of the directly monumented tripoints actual
          rwtzug etc presumed
          mzszzas etc probable
          arbrpy etc uncertain
          bwnazmzw etc conflicting

          this is not verbatim
          but they also indicate that any of the 3 bilaterally agreed boundaries that converge in a trijunction may fall short of or overstep either of the other bilaterally agreed boundaries
          or 
          may end on one of the other 2 but not at the location of their coincident endpoints

          good food for thought
          or at least for trying to think straight





          Jesper

           


          Fra: boundarypointpoint@ yahoogroups. com [mailto: boundarypointpoint@ yahoogroups. com ] På vegne af aletheia kallos
          Sendt: 22. april 2010 00:27
          Til: boundarypointpoint@ yahoogroups. com
          Emne: [boundarypointpoint ] rwtzug question

           

           

          our old notes say brownlie indicates this tripoint is at the thalweg junction of the kagera & kagitumba

           

          but the notes could be wrong because all 3 relevant ibs studies 

          say the tripoint is at the junction of the midstream of the kagera & the thalweg of the kagitumba

           

          this is apparently because they cite evidence indicating rwtz follows the midstream of the upper kagera

          tho they do agree tzug follows the thalweg of the lower kagera

          & rwug the thalweg of the kagitumba

           

          so my question for anyone who has access to a copy of brownlie is

          does he actually say anything explicitly about the location of this tripoint

          & if not

          then does he place rwtz on the midstream of the kagera or on the thalweg of the kagera 

          & based on what evidence does he do so

           

          topo

           

          note that the truth appears to be that if a boundary trijunction occurs in a river confluence & the three convergent boundaries are not unanimous in following either the thalweg or the midstream

          then the tripoint must actually be indefinite or irrational

           

          but i am still hoping to get a better grasp of the facts before concluding anything about this one

           

           

           

           


        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.