How the States Got Their Shapes has history of all the border disputes between the states.
Well, Runner Pat, then, to quote Bender: John Denver can kiss my shiny-metal A$$.
I could certainly say some negative things about his beloved West Virginia (A beautiful state, BTW).
The reason NJ doesn’t dispute this is because of how the Supreme Court ruled in the NJ/NY dispute over Ellis Island/Liberty Island.
Essentially, if you divide the Hudson River/Bay down the middle, those two islands would be on the NJ side. But since time immortal, they were considered part of NY. When NJ contested this, the Supreme Court came up with this compromise: all the land that was originally part of the island above water was NY, all of the area that was under water was NJ.
Which meant that all of the fill that was added to Ellis Island to accommodate it’s immigration duties became part of New Jersey.
Basically, NJ can’t really dispute the Delaware side without causing issues with the NY/NJ split (since it’s essentially the same issue) … and in reality, it’s a handful of acres of not-really-useful land in pretty industrial areas so the “house with kid” example probably isn’t a concern anytime soon.
Wikipedia has a decent description of the NY/NJ/Ellis Island dispute.
How the States Got Their Shapes, linked above, is a really good resource for more.
This is another problem, not just in the US but around the world. Diverting water out of a river or lake affects everyone downstream. And if the people upstream get too greedy, it becomes a hardship for the people downstream. Again, there comes a point where the local community needs to be forced to live within their means. And that may mean finding ways to limit growth to what the local environment can sustain.
hajario: for the purposes of my argument, it doesn’t really matter where the water goes; what matters is, it’s being diverted. I’m sure Mexico would like it if that river still had enough water to reach the sea. There are similar problems with rivers and lakes all around the world. Lake Baikal in Russia is a fraction of its original size due to incessant water diversion upstream.
The article linked by MikeS contains the statement:
“Additionally, the Tennessee River’s headwaters are located in Georgia, churning out 1.6 billion gallons of day from Georgia for Tennessee.”
Really? The Tennessee River forms from the confluence of the Holston River and the French Broad River in Knoxville. The only river that flows from GA into TN is the Ocoee (called Tocoa in GA), which flows into the Hiwassee before flowing into the Tennessee.
Seems a bit of a stretch to say that the Tennessee River’s headwaters are located in GA.
Realistically, if this ever became an issue for some reason, New Jersey would probably arrange to sell that little chunk of land to Deleware for some nominal price. There is a similar situation with Michigan and Ohio. There is a tiny bit of land, the tip of a little bitty penninsula, that is not attached to Michigan, but is part of it because it sticks up above the parallel that marks the boundary between Michigan and Ohio. Legally, I think it’s considered a township in Monroe County. The sensible solution would be for Mighigan to sell it to Ohio for a few bucks, but nobody seems to care. I think there’s also at least one tiny island which is split between MI and OH. IIRC, it has the ruins of a lighthouse, but is otherwise an unimportant rock.
That struck me too. But remember the whole article is written from Georgia’s point of view (seems to be someone who works for a Georgia legislator or in the Attorney General’s office).
The map detail of the contended border is here, and won’t 404. Scroll down a bit.
The common law principle was that possession is 9 points of the law. Under common law, there were nine points favorable to the possessor or occupier. I don’t think adverse possession can be had against a governmental body.
However, while the “landfill goes with owner of river bottom” bit may be true for one chunk of Eastern-Shore Delaware (this is a concessive; I don’t know), the main piece has nothing to do with where the state line runs relative to the river bottom, middle, and banks, but rather that there’s one multiacre stretch of Delaware shoreland surrounded by New Jersey and the Delaware River because it is within 12 miles of New Castle Courthouse – the same reason that Delaware has that arcuate northern boundary that appears to take a bite out of Pennssylvania when compared to the Mason-Dixon line to its west.
On NY-NJ battles:
The PATH subway line is this strange.(to me) bastard child of the two. After 9/11 (PATH link) Silverman, the holder of the World Trade Center title, was further stymied when the two states bickered over whose land/responsibility it was in any insurance recovery.
I think I said it right, but I don’t trust myself. It’s like the Port Authority is the 51st state.Anyone with more knowledge, and how it fell out?
Any other “we’ll share it” deals between states? Those must be a bitch to maintain.
Can I say it now? Good.
Bad for glass.
Joke, Joke! I added that WI was the real loser, suggesting that I wasn’t really taking that claim seriously. It just seemed like a funny thing to say.
Corporal Klinger, is that you? 
The common clay of the new Midwest?
Where does the phrase “Holy Toledo” come from?
To avoid that kind of effort (and potential error), most AUS titles are on the Torrens system. Kind of pathetic that a semi-civilized country like the USA doesn’t have more of it.
Although Cook County was the first place in the USA to use the system, Illinois doesn’t use it AFAIK.
OK, the problem is that, rather than the parties having to prove ownership on a continuous chain, assuming the abscence of any un-noticed branches, in the Torrens system the state does it once, then guarantees title ever after. Conveyancing becumes trivial, but it doesn’t actually help in state-state disputes.
Sometime in the last decade, Virginia successfully sued for access to drinking water from the Potomac, despite the river being wholly owned by Maryland (and a little bit to DC). This could be a relevant precedent for Georgia.
Not highly relevant. Virginia territory borders the river for many miles, and agreements running back as far as 200 years gave Virginia specific rights to the river and its water (rights that had continuously been exercised). The Supreme Court merely ruled that these agreements were still in effect.