WARNING ... Arcane geographic trivia and historical factoids follow 
... liberal use of the delete key is recommended!!!


Hi Fred, et al.

Every time this subject comes up, I learn something new. From 
previous research, I have always thought that the Potomac belongs to 
MD, beginning at the HIGH water mark on the VA side, as your message 
states; however, when I saw your message, something drove me to 
recheck some references to refresh myself on this MD/DC/VA border 
issue ... such things are important to the MD/DCRC.

I had also thought the high water mark on the VA side of the Potomac 
marked the VA boundary with MD and DC. Apparently, the original 
colonial charters of both VA and MD gave each state ownership of the 
entire Potomac River. The 1632 land grant from King Charles I to Lord 
Baltimore apparently was interpreted to define the MD boundary as the 
high water mark of the river on the VA side. However, in it's first 
state constitution in 1776, Virginia ceded the river back to MD, but 
reserved free use rights of the river, although this claim remained 
disputed by MD. In 1877, both states agreed to granting MD 
bank-to-bank control of the river, from the LOW water line. Take a 
look at this web site and read the paragraph on the "The Arbitration of 1877."

         http://www.mdoe.org/potomacriverva.html

This seems to clearly state that the boundary should be the low water 
mark ... which theoretically could place some shoreline (e.g., 
shorebird) records between the high and low tide marks in VA rather than in MD.

FYI ... a high water mark claim to the Northern Branch of the river 
by WV was rejected by the Supreme Court in two separate decisions in 1910 ...

         http://www.wvculture.org/History/government/mdboundary02.html

The 2003 VA v. MD Supreme Court case over waterway and water 
withdrawal rights provides an interesting historical context ...

         http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=12-9orig


I really need to get a life ... !!!

Phil


At 08:52 03/18/2009, Fred Fallon wrote:
>Oops! It was indeed "black", but of course I meant the "Surf Scoter" 
>at Seneca.
>BTW, how lucky we are in MD that Lord Baltimore got his grant 
>extended to the high water mark on the VA side of the river - or so 
>many of these sightings could not be counted in MD.

===================================================
Phil Davis, Secretary
MD/DC Records Committee
2549 Vale Court
Davidsonville, Maryland  21035     USA
301-261-0184
mailto:[log in to unmask]

MD/DCRC Web site:  http://www.MDBirds.org/mddcrc/rcindex.html
===================================================