Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Do You Know Where You Live?

Posted by michael on Fri Aug 02, 2002 01:40 PM
from the 1600-pennsylvania-avenue dept.
Technology
An anonymous submitter writes "Thanks to GPS, it seems quite a few people are discovering they don't live where they thought. Prior to GPS, state, county and city borders were part law, part measurement, and part guesswork. Now, they're able to go back and discover where actual borders should be, and it's making many people unhappy. Some familes in Rhode Island are finding out they may actually live in Connecticut. Each state, county and city wants as much land as possible, because it means more tax income. The people caught in the middle simply want to know where they'll send their kids for school."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Do You Know Where You Live? 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Borders (Score:5, Funny)

    by ThereIsNoSporkNeo (587688) on Friday August 02 2002, @01:41PM (#4000385)
    NOOOOOOOoooooooo...

    I'm Canadian!

    • Re:Borders (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Angry White Guy (521337) <CaptainBurly[AT]goodbadmovies.com> on Friday August 02 2002, @01:44PM (#4000417)
      Maybe we could use GPS to get back the portions of Alaska that stretch down our west coast!

      Idiocy at it's best.

      • Re:Borders (Score:4, Informative)

        by Medevo (526922) on Friday August 02 2002, @01:58PM (#4000561) Homepage
        If you read history, in about 1900 Canada and the USA were fighting over Alaska (and those coastal regions). Since Canada was still pretty much a British colony the British and Americans formed a group of 5 (2 Americans, 2 British, 1 Canadian) that heard arguments from both sides, and were to vote based on the arguments. In the End the British decided to vote for the Americans to help improve relations (this is one of many times the British sold of Canada to create favors for themselves).

        Medevo

              • Re:Borders (Score:4, Funny)

                by Zone5 (179243) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:38PM (#4000922)
                Interesting opinion. Have you ever tried *listening* to one of the british trying to speak their own language? It's obvious that at one time they spoke the queen's english, but that is no longer the case. Canadians do in fact on average speak a more 'pure' dialect of the english language than do the english people themselves.

                If one were to accept the premise that the shifting of a language over time in its homeland remained the accepted standard for that language, wouldn't welsh and manx both be considered alive and well, and stunningly similar to common english?
          • Who burnt down who's capital building buddy!

            The British burned down the American's. Did they get the Capitol Building or was it just the White House and miscellaneous other buildings? (Not that any Americans would know, since they aren't taught about wars they didn't win.)
    • ...at least you didnt find out you are mexican...

      Oh great, here comes INS...


    • NOOOOOOOoooooooo...

      I'm Canadian!

      Welcome to the fold, eh! Want some poutine [umanitoba.ca], ya hoser?

    • Re:Borders (Score:4, Funny)

      by _ph1ux_ (216706) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:01PM (#4000586)
      "I'm Canadian"

      It like an american - but without the gun.
    • "NOOOOOOOoooooooo... I'm Canadian!"

      I'm canadian and issues such as where the borders of municipalities meet are important because people who live close to a border, like me, could end up paying MUCH higher property taxes depending on which side they live. I guess this really isn't a Canadian issue alone because I'm sure that cities exist in other countries as well ;-)

        • Re:Borders (Score:5, Funny)

          by paladin_tom (533027) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:38PM (#4000917) Homepage

          Ahem... may I as what you consider a real beer?

          Yes, you've used "eh" correctly. It's most often used to transform a statement ("American beer tastes like cow piss.") into a question ("American beer tastes like cow piss, eh?").

          However, if you replace "no" with "eh", you should remove the "Surely". Otherwise you're mixing "British aristocrat" with "Canadian lumberjack", in a way that nature did not intend.

  • The gps receiver on my visor tells me I'm no where near work.
  • that's the good part about having lived around rivers all my life. I know where the state line is.
    • Actually, the Rio Grande moved over the last two weeks. This means Mexico just got bigger. Sadly, it also means someone will have to dig out the hot springs. I've never quite understood their attraction in the desert, but to each his own - speaking of, it appears that, for now, the Rio Grande river god of Big Bend Nat'l Park has reclamed his/her spring.
  • Glad to find out I *DON'T* live in San Francisco after all, couldn't take another one of those summers
  • Wherever you go, there you are!

  • great! (Score:3, Funny)

    by jeffy124 (453342) on Friday August 02 2002, @01:48PM (#4000458) Homepage Journal
    maybe that can solve the India-Pakistan problem....

  • I'm always in the State of Confusion.

  • Related problem (Score:5, Informative)

    by JUSTONEMORELATTE (584508) on Friday August 02 2002, @01:49PM (#4000473) Homepage
    I used to work in the Oil-n-Gas business (petroleum, not Taco Bell) and that industry is grappling with the same question about well spotting -- the exact surface location of a well. Historically, they are identified via footage calls from a known location (e.g. 354' N, 287' E of SW corner of such-n-such)
    While the state agencies would love to have nice, precise lat-lon coords, the property owners often refuse access to the survey crews because an accurate survey may show that the property line is incorrect, and Farmer Smith never really owned the well, it's on Farmer Johnson's land.
    The real financial impact can be huge.

    • Re:Related problem (Score:4, Insightful)

      by gilroy (155262) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:02PM (#4000599) Homepage Journal
      Blockquoth the poster:
      the property owners often refuse access to the survey crews
      It amazes me people can refuse access. Even if you believe in the virtual sancitity of private property you own, until the survey is done, you don't know you own it. Couldn't the state argue that, to know where your "denial" begins, they need to get on your land anyway?

      For that matter, say Farmer Johnson thinks the well is on his land. Can't he grant access for the survey team to walk the perimeter of his land, and then see where the well ends up?

      • Re:Related problem (Score:4, Interesting)

        by JUSTONEMORELATTE (584508) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:48PM (#4001006) Homepage
        Blockquoth right back atcha:
        It amazes me people can refuse access. Even if you believe in the virtual sancitity of private property you own, until the survey is done, you don't know you own it. Couldn't the state argue that, to know where your "denial" begins, they need to get on your land anyway?
        In some parts of the county (Mississippi, to be precise) the state survey crews have been greeted by shotgun-toting farmers (ranchers? I've not spent a lot of time in MS) when the survey crews come to call. When I say they are refusing access, I don't mean some lawyer in a suit, I mean a very simple, literal (and effective!) refusal. In a very rural setting like this, the survey crew isn't going to get a lot of support from the local sherrif, and the state law enforcement has better things to do.
        For that matter, say Farmer Johnson thinks the well is on his land. Can't he grant access for the survey team to walk the perimeter of his land, and then see where the well ends up?
        In many cases, this is exactly how the state (dept of revenue in some places, dept of environmental quality in others) is getting the job done. Doesn't always work though, there may be several wells along the property line, some on each side. It's an agrarian Prisoner's Dillema!
        What's always been funny to me is that the state agencies that care about well locations don't care at all about property lines. One of the most effective efforts involved establishing fixed points for differential GPS, then sending backpack-sized receivers in with the well maintenance crews. It's a nutty industry all around.
        • In a very rural setting like this, the survey crew isn't going to get a lot of support from the local sherrif, and the state law enforcement has better things to do.

          The state law enforcement has better things to do than arrest someone for open threatening or assault with a firearm? Damn, but i'm staying the fuck OUT of that state.
  • We're currently having issues at work with that silly GPS, as it's nowhere nearly as reliable as we'd need when it comes to field use. You know where you stand, but you can't quite know where most of the limits are supposed to be, thanks to the napoleonic era cadastre that is still used. So, while getting the data to map again, the surface we get for a given plot can be wildly different from what was previous declared, with no way to know which is right. So what good are precision tools when you still have to rely on your eyes and ancient maps?

  • No surprise (Score:4, Funny)

    by Deadstick (535032) on Friday August 02 2002, @01:55PM (#4000521)
    In writing the manual for some civil engineering software back in the 80s, I found that there are some very oddly laid-out survey markers out there, especially in the plains states. The client explained that most of these were laid in the mid-19th century, which was the peak period of American alcohol consumption.

    rj

  • well... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Auckerman (223266) on Friday August 02 2002, @01:57PM (#4000544)
    I suspect in the cases sited, which used rivers to determine boundries, you will see the old common law agreements sticks. When you are measuring within a few feet to find a spot that moves (a few yards) with the seasons, on both sides of the border no less), you're new "accurate" measurement has little value and one is still stuck with simple common agreement.

    Would be an easy case to present, and keeping common agreed boundries is a no brainer. If one starts using fixed points on boundries, who's to say a narrow river that is used as a boundry will not just move entirely into another state or county...imagine the implications for water management...

    No rational person wants that.

    • Re:well... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Lumpish Scholar (17107) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:21PM (#4000758) Homepage Journal
      No rational person wants that.
      True; but we're talking about lawyers and politicians....

    • If it were my choice, I'd change all current records to the real coordinates of the previously accepted borders, therefore records are now accurate, nobody has to be bothered by changing schools, tax arrangements, addresses etc... If anyone complained I'd say "Well, if it really matters that much, you should have done your own damn survey, just in case!". Seems pretty sensible to me, but...

      No rational person wants that.

      ...it's not about what rational people want. It's about what lawyers and state governors want!

      Ali

    • This is GOVERNMENT. It won't happen.

      Almost every time political boundaries need to be altered (for representatives), these people don't move the border around a few houses, they rewrite the entire map to best suit their own agenda. Legislative Redistricting [rev.net] causes this problem (known as Gerrymandering) in elections again [jsonline.com] and again [washingtonpost.com] and again [halfbakery.com] ALL OVER THE USA.

      You are right about no rational people wanting it. There are many rational people who have offered ways to restructure boundaries that offer the biggest human benefit and lowest government cost. These ideal solutions segment the groups by physical boundaries and population density. But government is not a rational entity.

      There are countless smart was to divide it up. Clusters of people should rationally be served by the same set of government. People between clusters should be separated by distance to the clusters and other boundaries (hills, rivers, roads). In dense population areas, map the location of a current road, or a side of the road, as the boundary -- not the line between where two rivers meet and where another river enters a lake bed.

      And of course after two counties or states go to court fighting it out -- costing millions of taxpayer dollers -- They will put out big press releases saying either "We saved tax money by moving these buildings outside of our county!" or "We increased tax revenue without increasing taxes!", overlooking the fact that they wasted millions in the process.

      frob.

    • Re:well... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ckedge (192996) on Friday August 02 2002, @03:48PM (#4001485) Journal

      GPS Coordinates, I'd imagine that they don't account for continental drift, eh?

      One inch a year adds up over a century or two. So by default you can't use precise GPS coordinates, unless you account year by year for all the plate movement.

  • Very Easy Solution (Score:5, Funny)

    by unsinged int (561600) on Friday August 02 2002, @01:58PM (#4000549)
    Just make a 51st state that includes Everyone Living on the Thick Black Lines of the US Map. Think of all the interstate commerce with all the states they'd border! Oh, but wait, what about the people living on the border between the new Border State and the other states? Let's create another...ouch. **Brain implosion**
    • Oh, but wait, what about the people living on the border between the new Border State and the other states? Let's create another...ouch. **Brain implosion**

      Wow...Infinitely recursive bureaucracy! Maybe this is how we can fix those nitwits in Congress!

      I mean, most of them have hairpieces, so they wouldn't fall prey to the old robot trap of "Lather-Rinse-Repeat"...

  • Old Land (Score:3, Interesting)

    by N8F8 (4562) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:00PM (#4000576)
    I bought a piece of peopery in Surry County Virginia a few years ago. I had a hell of a time because the recorded deed goes back more than a hundred years and refers to chops in trees for markers and distances measured in chains.

    Most mortgage companies wouln't touch it without a recent survey. I finally found a farm credit company that would give me the mortgage. I've had the road frontage surveyed but I still have to survey the other 60+acres. Researching the sale was quite an education.

    I could go down to the city office and pull up three different aerial surveys of the area, but no land surveys. Reaally sad because the county taxes me on 40 acres and acording to the surveyer I used for the frontage, I probably have 80+ acres.

  • Reminds me of Four Corners.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by wowbagger (69688) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:01PM (#4000585) Homepage Journal
    Last year, I went through Four Corners - for those of you not up on your US geography, Four Corners is the point at which Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah all meet, being the only place in the US where 4 states meet.

    I was struck by the arbitrariness of this location - it was nothing but a meeting of fictional lines on a map. There was no magical property of this location - c was still 3E8 m/sec (to 1 significant digit), 9.8 m/sec^2 acceleration, no majestic peaks, poles, or pyramids rising from the ground. Save for a decision made by a bunch of beaurcrats there was nothing special about this location.

    This article strikes me the same way. Due to a complete non-event (the changing of a line on a map), people's lives are going through upheaval.

    So we are able to more accurately define these imaginary lines. Why do we need to change the location of the border - why not just more accurately define existing practice. Look at a map of Kansas - the state USED to be a simple rectangle, until somebody decided to use the river to define the northeast corner. Now we have the silliness of "Kansas City, Mo!"

    It just seems so wasteful!

    • Re:Reminds me of Four Corners.... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gilroy (155262) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:09PM (#4000658) Homepage Journal
      Blockquoth the poster:
      there was nothing special about this location.
      What is special about Four Corners is exactly that there is nothing special. The mid-US states are amazing in the political undertone. Look, those borders were drawn by some guys with a pencil and straightedge. No natural fortification. No concern for defensible borders. No historical or trade mandates. What a wonderful thing to break free of that mindset! Those lines were drawn for administrative convenience only.

  • The West Wing ... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SuperRob (31516) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:02PM (#4000601) Homepage
    That makes me laugh. "The West Wing" had a bit on that a couple of weeks ago (it was a re-run) where Donna wasn't allowed into a Government party because she was an illegal alien. Turns out the borders got moved, and she had been born in CANADA. Ha, ha!

    Seriously, it was resolved by the end of the show, by deciding that anyone that these changing borders had effected would be "grandfathered" in. In other words, once they make you a citizen, they can't take it away from you.

    Wonder if that would be ACTUAL government policy now that it's more likely to be a REAL issue ...
  • And if not, WHY not?

    how would this be any different than cities/counties/whatever annexing land like they do now?

    Borders change all the time - maybe not usually in a state border situation - but certainly often at lower government levels.

  • For all you non-Rhode Islanders (Score:4, Funny)

    by RadioheadKid (461411) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:10PM (#4000664)
    First off, c'mon RI is so small anyways, just let them have a little more land. You know that little chunk that Massachusetts has along the top of CT, I think CT is still pissed off about that and taking it out on RI.

    The other amusing thing is this quote: "It bothers me giving up my low-number license plate with my initials on it." It's kind of a hobby, maybe even an obsession, of some people in RI to try and get a low number (or as they say in RI "low numba") license plate, for example if you had w-12, you would be all the envy in the state. License plates are typically two letters and three numbers in RI.

  • You mean? (Score:5, Funny)

    by aengblom (123492) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:48PM (#4001001) Homepage
    I can't believe these "surveyors" are that bad. I mean it's not as if the states aren't all different colors! I live in central PA so it's all green. New Jersey, as we all know, is orange! Perhaps we should get some non-color blind folks out there to define the borders!

    Hint: Black line=new state!

    • Your either trolling, or overly paranoid.

      I have a GPS receiver. Note, I said RECEIVER! It doesn't transmit anything.

      Kinda fun to use on commercial airliners too! (I have an interesting trace of a recent trip, its only partial but shows us flying in anything but a straight line. (We were avoiding some rough weather).
    • I believe that Sprint's (and other manufacturers') new third-generation phones come out soon - many of them are bundled with GPS capability.

      It's touted as a convenience (calling assistance and saying "find me an ATM") and/or safety feature (Calling Cell 911 with "I've just been probed by aliens and have no idea where I am, come save me!"), but I wonder how soon marketing people (and Big Brother) will get a hold of the info... "Hm, this person spends 10 hours a week at supermarket A, let's SMS-page him with sale announcements for our client, supermarket B!"

      *shrug*
    • From Garmin's website "The 24 satellites that make up the GPS space segment are orbiting the earth about 12,000 miles above us. They are constantly moving, making two complete orbits in less than 24 hours. These satellites are travelling at speeds of roughly 7,000 miles an hour. GPS satellites are powered by solar energy. They have backup batteries onboard to keep them running in the event of a solar eclipse, when there's no solar power. " About GPS [garmin.com]

    • Re:use common sense... (Score:5, Informative)

      by stoolpigeon (454276) <bittercode@gmail> on Friday August 02 2002, @01:59PM (#4000570) Homepage Journal
      such as taxes, etc, that's fine...they don't directly effect your day-to-day life

      You must not have a job yet.

      There is also a lot more than taxes or schools involved that directly impact peoples daily lives. State laws can vary greatly. I'm in the middle of my state. But what if I lived near some other state and suddenly things I own are illegal (I've got a rifle that would fit this easily in some places)

      This is a pretty big deal and I think what will have to utlimately happen is people will need to move if they really don't want to live where they really live.

    • Re:use common sense... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Zapman (2662) on Friday August 02 2002, @02:02PM (#4000597)
      The problem with this is that both RI and Conn. are planning on sending taxes to these residences, and BOTH expect to collect. If they don't they will take these people to court in either RI or Conn, where they will be guilty.

      What do you do in that case? It certainly will impact you, especially if one state is a tourism state (collects lots of revenue from sales tax) and the other is a property tax state.

      --Jason

    • Re:use common sense... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Dynedain (141758) <slashdot2&anthonymclin,com> on Friday August 02 2002, @02:22PM (#4000774) Homepage
      But where does that funding come from to pay for the kid's schooling? Property taxes. No state is going to want to take a decrease in their property taxes without the associated decrease in students. So a change in tax structure will affect everyday lives. The money to pay for that kid's education doesn't just appear out of loopholes, and it would cost more to transfer the money between states than it does to send that kid to school.

      And what happens when the parents have another kid? Does he/she go to the same school or to one in their "new" state? How long does it get grandfathered? One generation? One continuous family line? Does it stick with the property? If so, then give the property to the state where the people are using the tax money.

      And there's more than just taxes to fund schools...you also have roads, sewer, zoning issues, etc. etc. etc....

      Part of why the US isn't a true democracy is because the majority typically overules the minority. So, by correcting state lines, some 50 people out of a combined population of a couple million are affected....an extremely small minority that probably won't notice much of a difference anyways.
    • the other things, such as taxes, etc, that's fine...they don't directly effect your day-to-day life...

      What about the elderly lady whose amublance service (that she presumably pays for with her taxes) would be switched to a town much farther away? It's a situation that shows how important these borders (and your taxes) can be...

      And what about voting districts? What if you're suddenly unable to vote for the school board for your child's district?

      In the Southwest, water rights are a big issue. I wonder if GPS has been making any changes to who gets to water their crops.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.