I love this type of story.?ÿ Most everyone in the world prefers to view things as being "settled".?ÿ Life is simpler that way.?ÿ Normally it is the "durned" surveyors that come along and upset the apple cart.
I vaguely recall reading a Kansas City newspaper story about 20 or so years back concerning the boundary between two counties not far from there.?ÿ I believe the discussion was over something close to a quarter-mile over quite some distance.
States have a higher responsibility to be certain of what is and isn't their territory.
State boundaries are heavily influenced by acquiescence. The U.S. Supreme Court favors settled boundaries over the technically correct boundary in most cases. The tendancy to acquiescence is stronger than other types of boundaries.
A long and fairly thorough article with no map, sigh.
These local guys are just p****g in the wind, Either Montana or Idaho would have to sue the other to get a final resolution. If one of the state governments surveyed then sued, that would be when it could be said the dispute is heating up.
Apparently the problem is the watershed boundary which is the State Boundary is moving both naturally and by manmade construction of railroad and freeway at the summit. There is a historic line and a current line.
It was fascinating to see that one of the watersheds, though the normal course of events, is losing water to another over time. Fascinating to think of the ramifications there, regardless of where the state line is.
