Talk:Great Miami River

As A Boundary?

I don't have my notes with me, but I don't believe the river was ever a boundary line. It seems to me the Treaty of Greenville Line went to the mouth of the river, but the line itself ran to the west of the river. PedanticallySpeaking 19:08, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

The treaty line was defined as follows:

The general boundary line between the lands of the United States and the lands of the said Indian tribes, shall begin at the mouth of Cayahoga river, and run thence up the same to the portage, between that and the Tuscarawas branch of the Muskingum, thence down that branch to the crossing place above fort Lawrence, thence westerly to a fork of that branch of the Great Miami river, running into the Ohio, at or near which fork stood Loromie's store, and where commences the portage between the Miami of the Ohio, and St. Mary's river, which is a branch of the Miami which runs into lake Erie; thence a westerly course to fort Recovery, which stands on a branch of the Wabash; thence southwesterly in a direct line to the Ohio, so as to intersect that river opposite the mouth of Kentucke or Cuttawa river.

Notes: There was no place named Fort Lawrence in Ohio -- it was apparently a spelling mistake intended to refer to Fort Laurens-named in honor of Henry Laurens a President of the Continental Congress. The fort was built by General Lachlan McIntosh, in 1778, on the West bank of the Tuscarawas River, now in Tuscarawas County, and near the Town of Bolivar.

The line roughly ran from the mouth of the Cuyahoga River in downtown Cleveland south to the Tuscarawas River near Bolivar, Ohio, then west to near Fort Loramie, Ohio, then northwest to Fort Recovery, Ohio, almost on the present Ohio-Indiana line. Then it cut southwest to the Ohio River in Indiana opposite the mouth of the Kentucky River at Carrollton, Kentucky. It's of interest to note the line from the Kentucky River to Fort Recovery was the original boundary used to organize the Indiana Territory. That boundary was later adjusted to be the mouth of the Great Miami when Ohio became a state.

So the mouth of the Great Miami had no part in the Greenville line, but a location on the river was. I suppose all this should be included in an article someplace, but I'm not up to making it fit coherently into any article right now. older ≠ wiser 21:01, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

According to the maps I examined, which I believe were from the Indiana state historical society, the boundary of the Indiana Territory was formed by the lower part of the river for several years (as indicated in the article) until between moved west to its present location. -- Decumanus 17:58, 2004 Oct 6 (UTC)

The Congressional Act [1] dividing Indiana Territory from the Northwest Territory describes the boundary as "all that part of the territory of the United States northwest of the Ohio river, which lies to the westward of a line beginning at the Ohio, opposite to the mouth of Kentucky river, and running thence to Fort Recovery, and thence north until it shall intersect the territorial line between the Inited States and Canada". The boundary was adjusted in the April 30, 1802, act that enabled Ohio to form a constitution and petition for statehood [2]. There the boundary of the state is described as "bounded on the east by Pennsylvania, on the south by the Ohio river, to the mouth of the Great Miami river, on the west by the line drawn due north from the mouth of the Great Miami, aforesaid, and on the north by an east and west line, drawn through the southerly extreme of Lake Michigan, running east after intersecting the due north line aforesaid, from the mouth of the Great Miami, until it shall intersect Lake Erie, or the territorial line, and thence with the same through Lake Erie to the Pennsylvania line aforesaid." This region in Indiana between the original boundary and the present boundary is known as the "gore", though I do not know where this term comes from. I do not think any portion of the Great Miami River above the mouth was ever a boundary of the Indiana Territory. older≠wiser 18:40, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)

Confused a little. Wouldn't the "gore" be in Ohio, since the boundary was moved westward, unless I'm misreading things (Fort Recovery was where, exactly--to the north and east of presentday Cincinatti, opposite the mouth of the Kentucky?) In any case, the map I looked at must have been inaccurate, or I misread it.-- Decumanus 19:34, 2004 Oct 6 (UTC)

I followed link to Fort Recovery. This is interesting. The map I looked at definitely showed a boundary following a river (GM?) *northeastward* from the Ohio, east of the present boundary, as if to its headwaters, then due northward to the northern tip of the lower peninsula of Michigan. I wish I could find it but that was a ways back.--Decumanus 19:36, 2004 Oct 6 (UTC)

OK, I was confusing the Licking River momentarily with the Kentucky River. Now it makes sense. this site offers a good view of the "gore" and of hte early boundary, which (I was mistaken) was moved east, not west. The article is therefore mistaken as it stands, so I take it out. No part of the GMR other than its mouth has ever served as a boundary. -- Decumanus 19:50, 2004 Oct 6 (UTC)

Another interesting point: the original organization act of the Indiana Territory you mentioned [3] stipulates that hte boundary of the future state (Ohio) would proceed north from the mouth of the GMR. I wonder why the discrepancy was made within the act between the boundary of Ind. Territory and NW Territory vs. boundary between Ind. Territory and future state of Ohio. -- Decumanus 20:13, 2004 Oct 6 (UTC)

Thanks, that is an excellent link. I haven't come across any explanation for why the boundaries changed. BTW, good to see you contributing again--haven't seen you around much recently. older≠wiser 20:43, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)

One thing: "gore" is old word meaning a triangular piece of cloth. Hence the wedge shape of the land between the old and adjusted boundaries.--Decumanus 20:21, 2004 Oct 6 (UTC)

Discharge Rate

I read a book that was sort of a compilation of back-of-the-envelope calculations of energy needs and usage. ("Powering the Future..." by Robert Laughlin).

He envisioned the usage of oil as a river flowing. I did some of my own calcs, and World Oil usage is about 162 cubic meters per second. I found that the Great Miami discharge rate is 152 cubic meters per second. Interesting visualization. That is a lot of oil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeb hhoh (talk • contribs) 12:34, 4 May 2022 (UTC)