Clinching Border Crossing Routes

[theroadwayone]

Kind of a straightforward question: What are the rules, if any, for clinching a route that ends at a border crossing? Do you have to cross the border or does the last U-turn, if there is one, count?

Since I just started working in Otay Mesa, CA, I took the 905 just the other day to the border crossing and then used the last U-turn. Hope that counts.

Thanks in advance.

[Rothman]

For me, if the Interstate ends right at the border or beyond the last exit to the U.S. (e.g., I-5 or I-190), I have to pass through the border crossing to clinch it (Had a lot of fun with I-5, actually, utilizing a shuttle service...).

If it doesn't (e.g., I-19), it's fine to turn around after the end of the route.

And yes, this does make clinching Interstates at the Mexican border quite difficult given the insurance requirement.

[Bruce]

Since I did a fair amount of my clinching during the great Canadian border lockdown of 2020/2021, I count it as long as I get to the last legal u-turn before the border. Way too many time-limited border crossings out west where requiring a full crossing would make it difficult to count.

[CtrlAltDel]

What are the rules, if any, for clinching a route that ends at a border crossing? Do you have to cross the border or does the last U-turn, if there is one, count?

The rules, for this and everything else regarding clinching, are whatever you want them to be. Some people, including myself, would say you need to cross the border, others don't.

I recall that we had a thread not too long ago that enumerated the major points of contention, such as exits, borders (and other places with restricted access), driver vs. passenger, realignments, extensions, day vs. night), but I can't find it.

[pderocco]

To me, it's not a game of technicalities. Since sightseeing is why I drive hundreds of different roads in the first place, I count a road as clinched if I've seen all the sights visible from the road. If you don't drive the last hundred yards or so before a border gate, it's unlikely that you've missed any significant scenery.

For all the driving I've done, I've done very few border crossings. To Canada, car ferry to Victoria, I-5, US-95, US-93, WA-21, US-395, I-75/I-96, Rainbow Bridge in Niagara, maybe I-190 a bit further north, and I-87. To Mexico, only into Tijuana on foot, through the same facility that handles I-5. That's it.

[mgk920]

I consider a route to be 'clinched' when I use the last U-turn before the 'point of no return', such as the last local access exits on I-81 and I-87.

Mike

[MikeTheActuary]

The rules, for this and everything else regarding clinching, are whatever you want them to be. Some people, including myself, would say you need to cross the border, others don't.

This is the correct answer.

Since I did a fair amount of my clinching during the great Canadian border lockdown of 2020/2021, I count it as long as I get to the last legal u-turn before the border. Way too many time-limited border crossings out west where requiring a full crossing would make it difficult to count.

I consider a route to be 'clinched' when I use the last U-turn before the 'point of no return', such as the last local access exits on I-81 and I-87.

I am not actively tracking clinched highways, but if I did, this is probably the guideline I'd follow.

(However, I do track which US-Canada border crossings I've transited, so....)

[Rothman]

If clinching routes means travelling on them entirely, missing the last bit means you haven't done so.

But, if it means, "Travelling as much as I can without beimg inconvenienced," so be it, but that doesn't seem like a very tight definition at all.

[Max Rockatansky]

Not every border crossing is maintained by a DOT right up to international borders.  In the case of CA 905 it does end at the border at Postmile SD R11.737.  On the other hand, nearby I-5 ends short of the actual border at Postmile SD R0.305 (at Camino De La Plaza specifically). 

Of course, this kind of thing is where I tend to draw the line with the practice of being overly anal about clinching numbered highways.  Trying to cross international borders just to get a sliver of road maintained by a state isn't something I see as a worthwhile investment of time.  I'm not sure what is obtained by the practice aside from minor bragging rights on this forum and TM? 

[vdeane]

In general, I will count them if I can see to the border without crossing.  In fact, my clinchings of NY 30, NY 189, VT 225, I-89*, and I-91 don't involve crossing.  However, I would argue that you can't do the same with I-81 or I-190.  I-87 and US 11 are both very sketchy as well for that (especially US 11, which is 3/4 of a mile between US customs and the border), though I did claim both before later finishing the job properly.  Basically, the fundamental question is "have you experienced the road, or did you leave a bit off because of where the last opportunity to turn off/around was?".

*You can't actually see that far from the ramp but you can from the overpass.  Although I'd like to do this one properly some day, especially as I'm not sure the ability to clinch the Canadian side similarly will survive the A-35 upgrade, and even that only works if you chain it with a sight clinch of the US side due to roadway curvature.

[Rothman]

Not every border crossing is maintained by a DOT right up to international borders.  In the case of CA 905 it does end at the border at Postmile SD R11.737.  On the other hand, nearby I-5 ends short of the actual border at Postmile SD R0.305 (at Camino De La Plaza specifically). 

Of course, this kind of thing is where I tend to draw the line with the practice of being overly anal about clinching numbered highways.  Trying to cross international borders just to get a sliver of road maintained by a state isn't something I see as a worthwhile investment of time.  I'm not sure what is obtained by the practice aside from minor bragging rights on this forum and TM? 

Pfft.  Maintenance means little.  The route is what matters, no matter who maintains it (see also NYC).

What is obtained by clinching the entire route is knowing that you clinched the entire route and did not leave a sliver behind.  99% =/= 100%.

[Max Rockatansky]

Not every border crossing is maintained by a DOT right up to international borders.  In the case of CA 905 it does end at the border at Postmile SD R11.737.  On the other hand, nearby I-5 ends short of the actual border at Postmile SD R0.305 (at Camino De La Plaza specifically). 

Of course, this kind of thing is where I tend to draw the line with the practice of being overly anal about clinching numbered highways.  Trying to cross international borders just to get a sliver of road maintained by a state isn't something I see as a worthwhile investment of time.  I'm not sure what is obtained by the practice aside from minor bragging rights on this forum and TM? 

Pfft.  Maintenance means little.  The route is what matters, no matter who maintains it (see also NYC).

What is obtained by clinching the entire route is knowing that you clinched the entire route and did not leave a sliver behind.  99% =/= 100%.

A lot of us wish it was that way out here.   Trouble is modern Caltrans and the legislature equate a Sign State Route to be what is on the active maintenance logs.  Marrying the Sign Route and Legislative Route definitions in 1964 had this as a side effect.  The 1934 Sign Route system didn't require Routes to be signed strictly on state maintained roads.

That isn't to say there aren't instances of left over signage on relinquished state highway segments.  On Pacific Southwest, I've brought up the situation with CA 187 still being signed despite it being fully relinquished back to Los Angeles.  It even has the caveat of the legislative definition still being on the books.  Most people (certainly not all) were of the opinion that CA 187 functionally doesn't exist.

This is the trouble with clinching sign routes.  Not all state DOTs nor all people in the community agree on what a sign route even is.  That being the case, all I can really say is that if driving up to a border for the sake of it means something to you then go for it.

[vdeane]

If US customs wanted to grill me on every bit on minutiae concerning my travel plans and look through my bags just for passing through Canada to get between upstate NY and Michigan*, which is probably the most normal thing I've ever done, then I can only imagine how they would respond to someone arriving at a low-volume crossing just to clinch a road.

*To be fair, I've been told that the Blue Water Bridge is known for being extra thorough, so this particular response might be more about them than about me.  Still, non-locals crossing at oddball rural locations are known to draw extra scrutiny.  Thankfully I didn't have any problems crossing in to Canada from US 11.

[NWI_Irish96]

What are the rules, if any, for clinching a route that ends at a border crossing? Do you have to cross the border or does the last U-turn, if there is one, count?

The rules, for this and everything else regarding clinching, are whatever you want them to be. Some people, including myself, would say you need to cross the border, others don't.

I recall that we had a thread not too long ago that enumerated the major points of contention, such as exits, borders (and other places with restricted access), driver vs. passenger, realignments, extensions, day vs. night), but I can't find it.

My rule for clinching at a border or anywhere else is if I can see it from where I am, it counts.

[Bruce]

If US customs wanted to grill me on every bit on minutiae concerning my travel plans and look through my bags just for passing through Canada to get between upstate NY and Michigan*, which is probably the most normal thing I've ever done, then I can only imagine how they would respond to someone arriving at a low-volume crossing just to clinch a road.

*To be fair, I've been told that the Blue Water Bridge is known for being extra thorough, so this particular response might be more about them than about me.  Still, non-locals crossing at oddball rural locations are known to draw extra scrutiny.  Thankfully I didn't have any problems crossing in to Canada from US 11.

I worry less about US Customs and more about the Canadians. They've had me under secondary searches at several crossings because I was using lower-trafficked ones.

[dlsterner]

If clinching routes means travelling on them entirely, missing the last bit means you haven't done so.

But, if it means, "Travelling as much as I can without beimg inconvenienced," so be it, but that doesn't seem like a very tight definition at all.

I think I would modify my personal definition to be "Observing as much as I can as practical".  I would like to drive the whole length, but it just isn't worth it to me to deal with a gate guard at a military installation, or to a border agent, just to make a U-turn and come right back in.

Besides, what if you get off the highway at a diamond interchange because you need to get gas (or to eat, or to pee)?  Do you have to somehow figure out how to drive the section of the mainline you missed because of the interchange in order to maintain a pristine clinch?

[Rothman]

Besides, what if you get off the highway at a diamond interchange because you need to get gas (or to eat, or to pee)?  Do you have to somehow figure out how to drive the section of the mainline you missed because of the interchange in order to maintain a pristine clinch?

Yes.

[Konza]

I'm leaning on Travel Mapping on this one.

If Travel Mapping says you need to go to the border, you need to go to the border.

I clinched I-94 earlier this week.  I needed to cross the Blue Water Bridge to do so.

There are a couple of routes in Arizona that I have not clinched because the southernmost segment goes to the border and I did not want to drive across it.  It would probably be easier to park on the US side and walk into Nogales or Aqua Prieta than it would be to do everything necessary to drive there.

[Rothman]

I'm leaning on Travel Mapping on this one.

If Travel Mapping says you need to go to the border, you need to go to the border.

I clinched I-94 earlier this week.  I needed to cross the Blue Water Bridge to do so.

There are a couple of routes in Arizona that I have not clinched because the southernmost segment goes to the border and I did not want to drive across it.  It would probably be easier to park on the US side and walk into Nogales or Aqua Prieta than it would be to do everything necessary to drive there.

Eh, TM is very approximate.  It's better to do aome research in the iffier situations.

[Konza]

Besides, what if you get off the highway at a diamond interchange because you need to get gas (or to eat, or to pee)?  Do you have to somehow figure out how to drive the section of the mainline you missed because of the interchange in order to maintain a pristine clinch?

If you get off and then get back on at the same intersection or interchange, as far as I am concerned you have clinched the segment.  Especially in the case of limited access highways, the entrance/exit ramps and frontage roads are part of the main route.  Ditto with rest areas.  If the main road was not there, the ramps, frontage roads, and rest areas would not be there, either.

[vdeane]

If you get off and then get back on at the same intersection or interchange, as far as I am concerned you have clinched the segment.  Especially in the case of limited access highways, the entrance/exit ramps and frontage roads are part of the main route.  Ditto with rest areas.  If the main road was not there, the ramps, frontage roads, and rest areas would not be there, either.

While I'm not nearly so strict as @Rothman, and will count clinches on c/d lanes in some circumstances, frontage roads seem to be a bit of a stretch to me.  There are even interchanges where I'll insist on driving the mainline, mainly large stuff like the I-84/I-691 interchange in CT or the A-440/A-25 interchange in Laval.

[Rothman]

Besides, what if you get off the highway at a diamond interchange because you need to get gas (or to eat, or to pee)?  Do you have to somehow figure out how to drive the section of the mainline you missed because of the interchange in order to maintain a pristine clinch?

If you get off and then get back on at the same intersection or interchange, as far as I am concerned you have clinched the segment.  Especially in the case of limited access highways, the entrance/exit ramps and frontage roads are part of the main route.  Ditto with rest areas.  If the main road was not there, the ramps, frontage roads, and rest areas would not be there, either.

I don't agree that exit/entrance ramps and frontage roads are the same as the route, at least in the case of Interstates.  Otherwise, exit ramps wouldn't be named exit ramps.  You're exiting from the route.

[pderocco]

If you get off and then get back on at the same intersection or interchange, as far as I am concerned you have clinched the segment.  Especially in the case of limited access highways, the entrance/exit ramps and frontage roads are part of the main route.  Ditto with rest areas.  If the main road was not there, the ramps, frontage roads, and rest areas would not be there, either.

While I'm not nearly so strict as @Rothman, and will count clinches on c/d lanes in some circumstances, frontage roads seem to be a bit of a stretch to me.  There are even interchanges where I'll insist on driving the mainline, mainly large stuff like the I-84/I-691 interchange in CT or the A-440/A-25 interchange in Laval.

Some frontage roads are built along with a freeway, e.g. those along the route 58 bypass around Mojave CA. Others are pre-existing roads that the freeway was built next to, such as parts of the old US-66 along I-40 in California, or the old US-80 along I-8. They might be considered differently. (Nobody ever drives the 58 frontage roads, though, because there is absolutely nothing built along them whatsoever, even after 20 years.)

In general, though, I wouldn't count a frontage road toward clinching the freeway, unless construction forced the freeway traffic onto it, as happened on I-8 for an extended period a couple years ago while they rebuilt I-8 all the way down to the dirt.