The OpenStreetMap community has long agreed that mapping cadastral parcels (land ownership) is not in scope. Protect area and National Park boundaries were supposed to be less difficult to confirm and more valid.
But if what we are going to start mapping in the USA is simply the federal ownership of land, that's just pure cadastre data. We might as well try to map all the private land parcels and keep that information accurate - but both tasks are too difficult, and the data is better provided by local governments directly. - Joseph Eisenberg On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 9:50 PM Bradley White <theangrytom...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you drive into a checkerboard >> area of private/public land, there are no Forest Service signs at the >> limits of private land. >> > > In my neck of the woods, USFS owned land is signed fairly frequently with > small yellow property markers at the boundaries. > > Privately owned land within a NF declared boundary is not under any > protection by the USFS, therefore tagging the administrative boundary as > 'protected_area' will lead to inaccuracies. The land areas that are > actually protected from development/have active resource management are > only the lands which the federal government owns within these > administrative boundaries. > > I think using the administrative boundaries is a good & practical first > approximation, but the goal should eventually to be to change over to the > actual land owned by the Fed and operated for conservation by the USFS. > >>
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
