 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2009Definition of "Mean High Water" on Ordnance Survey Maps
Susan and I have undertaken the project of walking the River Wharfe in stages, 3 or 4 miles at a time, from its source in the Yorkshire Dales to its outflow into the River Ouse some 10 miles south of the city of York. The section we did today was close to Tadcaster, in the lower reaches of the river. The Ordnance Survey 2.5-inch map marks a feature of the river with the legend "Mean High Water". I have tried to look up the definition of this term using Google, but the only definition that I have been able to find is (paraphrased) "the difference in height between mean sea level and mean high tide". This definition is fine for an oceanologist, but is inappropriate and meaningless when applied to the marking of a river-feature on a map. Could somebody please supply the cartographical definition of the term, when applied to a feature on a river. I do not believe (although I could be wrong) that the river water would ever become saline at high tide, at the position marked. This position is still 30 miles or so upstream from the sea. The map contour on the land adjacent to the marked feature is 5m above mean sea level, although the river itself obviously will lie somewhat below this level. Richard Chambers Leeds UK. > Susan and I have undertaken the project of walking the River Wharfe in > stages, 3 or 4 miles at a time, from its source in the Yorkshire Dales to [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Richard Chambers Leeds UK. It's the average high water level as determined by averaging several years worth of observations. >> Susan and I have undertaken the project of walking the River Wharfe in >> stages, 3 or 4 miles at a time, from its source in the Yorkshire Dales to [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >It's the average high water level as determined by averaging several years >worth of observations. And the river is certainly tidal at this point. That has nothing to do with whether the water becomes saline, which it probably doesn't.  SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the From: address is not read. To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com" [...] > And the river is certainly tidal at this point. That has nothing to do > with whether the water becomes saline, which it probably doesn't. I've never been tempted to taste the Severn Bore near Gloucester. Even before I was passed by the bloated body of a sheep which had been in the water so long it had lost all its wool, and for a moment I feared it might be human. Oh, and, by the way, is it true that surfers and kayakers in sufficient numbers actually /break down/ a bore? "I don't mean to be boring," he said eagrely. SignatureMike. > [...] >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > "I don't mean to be boring," he said eagrely. Oh, this doesn't augur well, he said boringly >> [...] >>>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Oh, this doesn't augur well, he said boringly Surely you mean it doesn't auger well. Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >>Oh, this doesn't augur well, he said boringly > > Surely you mean it doesn't auger well. Is this a real alarm, or just a drill? SignatureNam Sibbyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi in ampulla pendere, et cum illi pueri dicerent: beable beable beable; respondebat illa: doidy doidy doidy. [plorkwort] >>>Oh, this doesn't augur well, he said boringly >> >> Surely you mean it doesn't auger well. > > Is this a real alarm, or just a drill? <bravo!> SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. >>>> Oh, this doesn't augur well, he said boringly >>> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > <bravo!> "Another clap!" he laughed infectiously. SignatureMike. Adam Funk filted: >>>Oh, this doesn't augur well, he said boringly >> >> Surely you mean it doesn't auger well. > >Is this a real alarm, or just a drill? Merely a caution of the possible presence of a tocsin....r Signature"You got Schadenfreude on my Weltanschauung!" "You got Weltanschauung in my Schadenfreude!" >Adam Funk filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Merely a caution of the possible presence of a tocsin....r That sounds a bit off, she muttered venomousy. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ >> [...] >>>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Oh, this doesn't augur well, he said boringly "I bring glad tidings", he said, with gravity. SignatureRobin (BrE) Herts, England >Susan and I have undertaken the project of walking the River Wharfe in >stages, 3 or 4 miles at a time, from its source in the Yorkshire Dales to [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >Richard Chambers Leeds UK. "Mean High Water" is the mean (a form of average) of all the high tides averaged over 19 years (I think that's the full tidal cycle). Mean High Water is likely the level above which heights of things ashore, and clearance under bridges, etc. are measured. You may want to consult a nautical chart for further information. SignaturePeter Bennett, VE7CEI peterbb4 (at) interchange.ubc.ca GPS and NMEA info: http://vancouver-webpages.com/peter Vancouver Power Squadron: http://vancouver.powersquadron.ca >>Susan and I have undertaken the project of walking the River Wharfe in >>stages, 3 or 4 miles at a time, from its source in the Yorkshire Dales to [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > >You may want to consult a nautical chart for further information. Unfortunately for the boater, a chart does not spell out the dynamic changes to river levels, day by day. Other means are available to him, one being local newspaper reports, another being books and magazines that specialize in white water canoeing. They give the boater a good idea of seasonal variation for various rivers, streams and bays. A third source of information is local knowledge and a fourth is your own eyewitness readings of river levels at the boat launching point, if nowhere else. "Mean high water" means the average high water line you can expect on a particular date, for whatever the reason, not simply waterline changes due to tidal movement. I'm not familiar with the River Wharfe, but for most rivers, rainfall into contributory streams is the major factor, not tidal motion. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland >>Richard Chambers originally asked:- >> [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > but for most rivers, rainfall into contributory streams is the major > factor, not tidal motion. Not just you Charles, but all the others who have responded to this question, seem (if I have interpreted them correctly) to have mis-read or misunderstood the question. If everybody has misunderstood, it must be my fault, not theirs. So I shall try again. The map simply marks a position on the river, some 30 miles inland, with the legend "Mean High Water". It does not say, for example, "Mean High Water = 1.5 metres". So all the definitions based on the difference of vertical height between "Mean Sea Level[1]" and "High Tide", averaged over 19 years, are irrelevant or inappropriate to the information the map is displaying. Vertical height differences are of interest to the oceanologist, but evidently are not of interest to the cartographer who prepared this map. [1] The mean of the height of the sea at low tide and at high tide. This definition of "Mean Sea Level", according to the glossary on my map, is the base from which all subsequent contour heights are measued. The replies that I have received have at least stimulated me to think more deeply about the problem. Here is the idea I have come up with:- In the larger estuary, the dominant flow will be caused by the tides. When the adjacent sea is rising due to the tide, the major flow of water into the estuary will be from the sea into the estuary. This flow will overwhelm the flow of water from the river into the estuary. Hence, as far as the river is concerned, there will be a back-flow of water into the estuary when this happens. If we go to a point well upstream in the river, well away from the coast, there will never be a back-flow of water at this point in the river, whatever the state of the tide. The river at this point is too high up to be affected by the tides. Would it be correct for me to assume that the point marked "Mean High Water" on the map is the most downstream position in the river where there is no tidal back-flow, under average tidal conditions? (i.e. neither neap nor spring tide, but the 19-year average). Because of the flow of water in the river, I would (intuitively) not expect the water to become saline, even for part of the day, at the "Mean High Water" point (assuming I have correctly guessed what that is). Is there a name for most downstream point of the river where the water never becomes saline, even at a Spring Tide? Richard Chambers Leeds UK. >>>Richard Chambers originally asked:- >>> [quoted text clipped - 92 lines] >name for most downstream point of the river where the water never becomes >saline, even at a Spring Tide? Googling >define: Mean High Water< finds a number of definitions including: http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/SARR/AWC/index.cfm/FA/defs.definitions "Mean high water" means a tidal datum used in referring to tidelands or the tidally affected portion of the stream, that is equal to the average of all high tides over a 19-year Metonic cycle, as established by the National Ocean Service of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. This says something similar: http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/browse?s=m&p=17 mean high waterThe average level of all high waters at a place over a 19-year period. Perhaps the point on the map is at (approximately) Mean High Water level. There may well be a physical marker there showing the level. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>>Richard Chambers originally asked:- >>>> >>>>The Ordnance Survey 2.5-inch map marks a feature of the river with the >>>>legend "Mean High Water". >If everybody has misunderstood, it must be my >fault, not theirs. So I shall try again. > >The map simply marks a position on the river, some 30 miles inland, with the >legend "Mean High Water". What sort of mark is it? Does the map show the river having breadth there, or is it just a thin blue line? If the river has breadth, I'd want to know if the mark specifically indicates a point on one or both sides of the riverbank, or in the river. Generally, the OS 1:25 000 maps (at least, the Explorer series) show MHW as a line, not a point, along the boundary between dry land and mud or sand -- foreshore, if you like -- on either side of the blue ribbon that shows the river at Mean Low Water. But when I read of a "feature" and a "position" marked MHW, then I don't visualise the feature as a continuous shoreline. Without further information, I'd reason that river height in Tadcaster, thirty miles from the estuary, is variable from season to season and according to the past week's precipitation, so the mark is unlikely to be related to the water height in the river. More likely, it points out where the land height equals mean high water at sea. I doubt if the OS measures river bed heights above sea level. But river banks go up and down. Can it mean a point at which the river would no longer burst its banks if the sea were held at high tide long enough for the back flow upriver to cease? But why would the OS bother with that? They already mark the Normal Tidal Limit as NTL. Can you check how far away your MHW feature is from the NTL? >The replies that I have received have at least stimulated me to think more >deeply about the problem. Here is the idea I have come up with:- [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >tidal back-flow, under average tidal conditions? > (i.e. neither neap nor spring tide, but the 19-year average). That is the point that should be marked NTL. It should be lower than MHW if the river is long, narrow and slow, because of the tide's turning and ebbing before the flood tide flow has travelled right up to its potential farthest point. Or so I reason, from the idea that the last few inches of tidal rise are going to take a very long time indeed to drive water 30 miles up a narrow channel. But the ebb may take nearly as long to catch up, I suppose. >Because of the flow of water in the river, I would (intuitively) not expect >the water to become saline, even for part of the day, at the "Mean High >Water" point (assuming I have correctly guessed what that is). Is there a >name for most downstream point of the river where the water never becomes >saline, even at a Spring Tide? Pass. SignaturePaul >>>>Richard Chambers originally asked:- >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >But when I read of a "feature" and a "position" marked MHW, then I don't >visualise the feature as a continuous shoreline. Could it be that it simply means the map, as drawn, is drawn as if the water were at MHW? Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * >On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:06:47 +0000, Paul Wolff ><bounceme@two.wolff.co.uk> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >Could it be that it simply means the map, as drawn, is drawn as >if the water were at MHW? I had an OS Explorer series 1:25 000 map before me as I typed, but not for Tadcaster. The Isle of Wight it was, actually. The Wight map was drawn with rivers at MLW. Then there was a tasteful mud-coloured band on either side up to the line marked MHW. Said mud-coloured band tended to end at NTL. SignaturePaul > < ... > > Can it mean a point at which the river would no longer burst its banks if > the sea were held at high tide long enough for the back flow upriver to > cease? But why would the OS bother with that? They already mark the > Normal Tidal Limit as NTL. Can you check how far away your MHW feature is > from the NTL? ----------------------------- On the River Ouse (the major river, into which the Wharfe flows) the "MHW" is marked at a point approximately 5 km upstream from the confluence of the two rivers. The NTL is marked a further 5km *upstream*, at Naburn Lock. This is near the village of Naburn, and is about 7 km south of the southern outskirts of York. There is a weir at this point in the river, so the tidal limit is man-made, not natural, at this point. The interesting thing about this is that the NTL is upstream from the MHW, contrary to your conjecture later in your posting. On the River Wharfe, there is a "MHW" marked at approximately 1km (as the crow flies) or 2 km (as the river meanders) upstream from its confluence with the Ouse. I cannot find a "NTL" associated with this marked point. I suspect that there might be a cartographical error, because there is a second "MHW" marked a further 5 km upstream on the same river, near the village of Ulleskelf. The associated "NTL" is a further 1 km upstream. The reason why I think there may be a cartographical error is simply a matter of logic. By definition, there can be only one MHW per river. To get back on topic (but only briefly and in passing, I hope) should I write < a "MHW" > or < an "MHW" >? --------------------------------------- < ... > >>Would it be correct for me to assume that the point marked "Mean High >>Water" [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > miles up a narrow channel. But the ebb may take nearly as long to catch > up, I suppose. ---------------------------------------- It is a little known fact that the Humber Estuary (into which the Ouse flows) has a tidal bore, very much the little brother of the Severn Bore, but nevertheless of appreciable height. This might affect your conjecture, and place the NTL upstream of the MHW. ---------------------------------------- Richard Chambers Leeds UK. > On the River Ouse (the major river, into which the Wharfe flows) the "MHW" > is marked at a point approximately 5 km upstream from the confluence of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The interesting thing about this is that the NTL is upstream from the MHW, > contrary to your conjecture later in your posting. No, that is quite logical and correct. The MHW is the *mean* of high tides, but the NTL (Normal Tidal Limit) is the point to which the highest *spring* tides flow - so it will be higher than the MHW. You should also find on your OS (both 1:25,000 and 1:50,000) that the lines at the edge of the river are darker and thicker on the tidal sections. The distinction isn't immediately obvious but it will be if you look either side of the NTL. Regards Jonathan >"Richard Chambers" <richard.chambers7_NoSpam_@ntlworld.net> wrote in message >news:IbudnQhkrdopJ_HUnZ2dnUVZ8r2dnZ2d@posted.plusnet... [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >distinction isn't immediately obvious but it will be if you look either side >of the NTL. It had not occurred to me until I read this that MHW might be a local measure. I had assumed that it was fixed at the coast. But of course local is what matters in a map. SignaturePaul >>You should also find on your OS (both 1:25,000 and 1:50,000) that the >>lines [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > measure. I had assumed that it was fixed at the coast. But of course > local is what matters in a map. MHW is, in effect, a line which runs all the way round the coast. When it reaches a river estuary it turns up the river until it reaches the mean high water mark of tides, at which point it crosses to the other bank and runs back down to the coast. Regards Jonathan >> On the River Ouse (the major river, into which the Wharfe flows) the "MHW" >> is marked at a point approximately 5 km upstream from the confluence of [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Jonathan Is Teddington a 'Tide ending town' or is it called after a man named 'Tuda'? >>> On the River Ouse (the major river, into which the Wharfe flows) the "MHW" >>> is marked at a point approximately 5 km upstream from the confluence of [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >Is Teddington a 'Tide ending town' or is it called after a man named >'Tuda'? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teddington The name 'Teddington' derives from an Old English tribal leader, and it was known in Saxon and Norman times as Todyngton and Tutington.[2] The name does not derive from 'Tide's End Town', as claimed by Rudyard Kipling among others. [2] John Sheaf, Ken Howe: Hampton and Teddington Past, Historical Publications, October 1995 ISBN 0-948667-25-7 page 9 That's Teddington, Greater London. There is also Teddington, Gloucestershire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teddington,_Gloucestershire Teddington was rumoured to have been founded by a traveller who was fond of making drinks. He wanted to open a pub in an area of flourishing population so that he would get lots of business. Finally he sought out a town but with very little people, but still he decided to stay and ask if the people there would help him build his tavern. The inhabitants agreed and they built the bar. After the structure was completed the people thought that it was such a magnificent building that they named the area, Teddington as was the mans last name- and the name of the pub, Teddington Hands as it had been made from scratch with the makers bare hands. Of course there are thousands of rumours and stories of how it was founded but this is one of the most believeable. However the Teddington Hands Inn was originally known as The Cross hands Inn and the name change only took place in the late 1980s after construction of the Teddington Hands Roundabout which realigned the Stow Road away from the side of the premises due to a high volume of serious road traffic accidents. The area gets its name from the historic fingerpost which formerly stood at the crossroads but now stands adjacent to the entrance to the pub. The finger post is a listed structure. The article also says: The village has a population of less than 300, of which the majority are professional commuters and elderly pensioners. What, I wonder, is the difference between a professional commuter and an amateur commuter? SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) > That's Teddington, Greater London. There is also Teddington, Gloucestershire: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teddington,_Gloucestershire ... > The article also says: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > What, I wonder, is the difference between a professional commuter and an > amateur commuter? Amateur commuters do it for sport; once they get paid, they change status. SignatureIn Karhide king and kyorremy have a good deal of control over what people do, but very little over what they hear, and none over what they say. Here, the government can check not only act but thought. Surely no men should have such power over others. (LeGuin 1969) >>>> On the River Ouse (the major river, into which the Wharfe flows) the "MHW" >>>> is marked at a point approximately 5 km upstream from the confluence of [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > What, I wonder, is the difference between a professional commuter and an > amateur commuter? Or the difference between an elderly pensioner and a young pensioner. > The name 'Teddington' derives from an Old English tribal leader, and it > was known in Saxon and Norman times as Todyngton and Tutington. So, that old King Tut got around a bit. SignatureRob Bannister [...] > Is Teddington a 'Tide ending town' or is it called after a man named > 'Tuda'? "If you've seen one Teddington, you've seen the lot," said Tuda weirily. SignatureMike. >On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 21:31:35 -0000, Jonathan Morton wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >Is Teddington a 'Tide ending town' or is it called after a man named >'Tuda'? Yes, Henry Tuda. A man with an ego the size of nearby Hampton Wick, with which he went a-courting. SignaturePaul Irwell wrote, in <byh1t8itlqwu.1vz8iez9vbn7.dlg@40tude.net> on Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:10:24 -0800: > >> On the River Ouse (the major river, into which the Wharfe flows) the "MHW" > >> is marked at a point approximately 5 km upstream from the confluence of [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Is Teddington a 'Tide ending town' or is it called after a man named > 'Tuda'? The tide didn't end there until the lock and weir were built. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE >> < ... > >> Can it mean a point at which the river would no longer burst its banks if [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >The interesting thing about this is that the NTL is upstream from the MHW, >contrary to your conjecture later in your posting. I don't mind at all. How else to learn? >On the River Wharfe, there is a "MHW" marked at approximately 1km (as the >crow flies) or 2 km (as the river meanders) upstream from its confluence [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >The reason why I think there may be a cartographical error is simply a >matter of logic. By definition, there can be only one MHW per river. That seems to make sense, but I am uneasy still about MHW being a point in the river. I want it to be extensive, and marked along the banks. Are you sure that it isn't just a repeated label to a continuous line? The way the height designation numerals are repeated at intervals along contour lines? >To get back on topic (but only briefly and in passing, I hope) should I >write < a "MHW" > or < an "MHW" >? So long as you put it in inverted commas, it takes an 'an'. That's my vote, anyway. >>>Would it be correct for me to assume that the point marked "Mean High >>>Water" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> >> That is the point that should be marked NTL. It should be lower than MHW Lower than coastal MHW is what I was thinking at the time. >> if the river is long, narrow and slow, because of the tide's turning and >> ebbing before the flood tide flow has travelled right up to its potential [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >and place the NTL upstream of the MHW. >---------------------------------------- Bores are an added complication, because I can envisage the slug of water overshooting the elevation (altitude) corresponding to MHW at the coast. Presumably a long, tapering estuary has the effect of accelerating the water on a rising tide. I imagine stepping on to a tube of toothpaste with the cap off, or more accurately, dispensing mastic through a tapering delivery nozzle. Considering the water, a large mass entering the mouth of a wide channel at slow speed is translated into the same mass (perforce) shooting up the narrowing channel at a range of speeds, all higher. Where the inherently greater momentum comes from, I can't say. Shouldn't it be conserved? Maybe the greater momentum of the faster water up the river is offset by the lost momentum of the water in the estuary that doesn't actually go anywhere else, or, as we say in the trade, "stops". So this bolus of water thrown up a suitably narrowing river may well travel beyond coastal MHW. SignaturePaul > Bores are an added complication, because I can envisage the slug of water > overshooting the elevation (altitude) corresponding to MHW at the coast. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > actually go anywhere else, or, as we say in the trade, "stops". > < ... > The tide is more akin to a sound wave than to a surface wave on the sea, and travels at 700 to 1000 mph around the earth. Conventional sound waves travel at a similar speed through sea water. The moon, which causes the tide, performs a rotation around the earth once every 28 days. Underneath this moon, the earth rotates at one revolution per 24-hour day. To a reasonable first-degree approximation, we can therefore neglect the slow 28-day motion of the moon, and think only of the spin of the earth under a nearly-stationary moon. The circumference of the earth at the equator is 24,000 miles. If the peak of the tide is to remain under the moon, the tide must travel at approximately 1000 mph around the equator. Approximately 700 mph at latitude 45 degrees. It is this speed that provides the momentum you are asking about. As the tide enters the estuary, the gently shelving sea-bed and the shallower water converts the tide-wave into a surface wave. Hence, a bore is formed. The recent tsunami in Thailand/Indonesia/Sri Lanka etc was formed by a similar process. Do not, however, confuse the speed of the wave with the speed of any part of the water. No part of the ocean moves at 1000 mph, but the tidal wave does move at that speed. In a similar way, when you speak the sound waves you produce go forward at 650 mph, but the air leaving your lips might well move at only 1 mph. Richard Chambers Leeds UK. >Paul Wolff wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >Do not, however, confuse the speed of the wave with the speed of any part of >the water. A well-placed reminder. But, there's a but. I have this idea that the water level behind a bore is higher than the level before it. >No part of the ocean moves at 1000 mph, but the tidal wave does >move at that speed. In a similar way, when you speak the sound waves you >produce go forward at 650 mph, but the air leaving your lips might well move >at only 1 mph. Pffui. (That's an experiment, not a judgement.) SignaturePaul >Presumably a long, tapering estuary has the effect of accelerating >the water on a rising tide. Hydraulic damming, innit? Same process as made the Columbia River Gorge and the Grand Coulee.... >So this bolus of water thrown up a suitably narrowing river may well >travel beyond coastal MHW. [giggle] -GAWollman SignatureGarrett A. Wollman | The real tragedy of human existence is not that we are wollman@csail.mit.edu| nasty by nature, but that a cruel structural asymmetry Opinions not those | grants to rare events of meanness such power to shape of MIT or CSAIL. | our history. - S.J. Gould, Ten Thousand Acts of Kindness Mean High Water is a line connecting points along the coast where the level of the high tides averaged over the tidal cycle reaches. On OS maps it is shown as a thick line. The Normal Tidal Limit is the point on a river below which there is a tidal range and above which there is no tidal range. This is shown on OS maps by the thick line showing Mean High Water ending change changing to a thin line. See: http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?x=488810&y=509071&z=120&sv=488810,509071&st=4 &ar=y&mapp=map.srf&searchp=ids.srf&dn=895&ax=488810&ay=509071&lm=0 >Mean High Water is a line connecting points along the coast where >the level of the high tides averaged over the tidal cycle reaches. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >071&st=4&ar=y&mapp=map.srf&searchp=ids.srf&dn=895&ax=488810&ay=509071&lm >=0 That's quite handy. But perhaps it only applies to the 1:50 000 maps. The 1:25 000 sheet that I was looking at doesn't show a solid black line for MHW unless it's the edge of a solid structure like a concrete jetty, a quay or a fortification. And MHW does seem to extend up rivers, so the line is not strictly limited to the (sea) coast. SignaturePaul > That's quite handy. But perhaps it only applies to the 1:50 000 maps. > The 1:25 000 sheet that I was looking at doesn't show a solid black line > for MHW unless it's the edge of a solid structure like a concrete jetty, The 1:25,000 uses a solid blue line for MHW and a change from coastal feature (eg mud, sand, etc) to water for MLW. > And MHW does seem to extend up rivers, so the line is not strictly > limited to the (sea) coast. "Coast" is that part of an island's geography that has a tidal range. London is on the coast, as is Ruswarp in the above link. -- JGH >Paul Wolff wrote: >> That's quite handy. But perhaps it only applies to the 1:50 000 maps. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >"Coast" is that part of an island's geography that has a tidal range. >London is on the coast, as is Ruswarp in the above link. I'm not sure that I agree at all. Some geographer may have declared it so, but general English usage would not accept that Richmond-upon-Thames was a coastal town. Nor would I give that honour to Newport IoW: <http://www.multimap.com/maps/?qs=newport+isle+of+wight&countryCode=GB#ma p=50.6995,-1.29323|11|4&bd=useful_information&loc=GB:50.6995:-1.29323:14| newport%20isle%20of%20wight|Newport,%20Newport%20and%20Ryde,%20Isle%20Of% 20Wight,%20England,%20PO30%201> or possibly more conveniently: <http://tinyurl.com/9gcpbv> SignaturePaul > It is a little known fact that the Humber Estuary (into which the Ouse > flows) has a tidal bore, very much the little brother of the Severn Bore, > but nevertheless of appreciable height. This might affect your conjecture, > and place the NTL upstream of the MHW. Not that little known - it continues up the Trent in particular and was the subject of a particularly painful pun by - I think - Mike Lyle a few days ago. Another "interesting" fact about the Ouse is that it has neither a source nor a mouth. It starts where the River Ure merges with the Ouse Gill Beck, and ends where the Ouse and the Trent merge to form the Humber. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu >"Richard Chambers" <richard.chambers7_NoSpam_@ntlworld.net> writes: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >source nor a mouth. It starts where the River Ure merges with the Ouse >Gill Beck, and ends where the Ouse and the Trent merge to form the Humber. But it does have another incarnation in Sussex. It is to be commended for finding a way from the High Weald to the sea through the South Downs without a map. I write as one who has been thrown into the Sussex Ouse, thrown others in, forded it, fallen in it, raced along it, bridged it, been flooded by it, and generally had an intimate relationship with it. Such are one's schooldays. Character-building, y'know. SignaturePaul On 14 Jan 2009, Paul Wolff wrote >> "Richard Chambers" <richard.chambers7_NoSpam_@ntlworld.net> >> writes: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > commended for finding a way from the High Weald to the sea > through the South Downs without a map. It has to detour through East Anglia to get there, though. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed >On 14 Jan 2009, Paul Wolff wrote > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >It has to detour through East Anglia to get there, though. The Ur-Thames did that, before it invented the Goring Gap. SignaturePaul >>"Richard Chambers" <richard.chambers7_NoSpam_@ntlworld.net> writes: >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > it, and generally had an intimate relationship with it. Such are one's > schooldays. Character-building, y'know. Sung to the tune of 'The old ash grove'? >On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:42:33 +0000, Paul Wolff wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > >Sung to the tune of 'The old ash grove'? Streamlets meandered and I pensively roved; but otherwise I'm whooshed. SignaturePaul |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.