Thanks for the link. I eventually unearthed the following, though I'm still not sure if there is a good source for state data, or if I have to collect it piecemeal.
NFS Index: http://svinetfc4.fs.fed.us/clearinghouse/index.html File Download: http://svinetfc4.fs.fed.us/clearinghouse/other_fs/alp/ALP_National_Forest_Boundaries.zip NPS Index: http://science.nature.nps.gov/nrdata/ Andrew On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Tracey P. Lauriault <[email protected]>wrote: > http://www.fgdc.gov/dataandservices > data.gov > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Andrew Johnson < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> Is there a public data source that contains boundary files for all the >> U.S. National Parks and Forests? Perhaps also state parks? >> >> Thanks, >> Andrew >> >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:25 PM, David Sonnen <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Tyler, >>> >>> I don't know of any academic studies that compare benefits of static maps >>> to >>> interactive maps or virtual globes. But, there are a bunch of studies >>> that >>> look at the value of geospatial information in various applications and >>> contexts. You might be able to splice together some of the methods and >>> get >>> a reasonable answer. >>> >>> Ordnance Survey cites their 1999 OXERA report a lot. >>> >>> http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/aboutus/reports/oxera/index.html >>> OXERA's ROI methods are pretty standard. I think that they've recently >>> updated that report, but I don't have a link. >>> >>> You might find useful ideas in some of the INSPIRE documentation. The EU >>> published a slick YouTube video that might be a good starting point. >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xr_sx0iHb1w The video touches on a lot >>> of >>> stock points about the value of geospatial information, interoperability >>> and >>> accessibility. The details are in the INSPIRE library. Going through >>> the >>> INSPIRE document collection is an exercise in endurance, but there is >>> some >>> good stuff in there. >>> >>> The UN's Economic and Social Council published a report in March that >>> touches on the broad value of geospatial information in the context of >>> economic development. >>> http://www.uneca.org/codist/codist1/content/E-ECA-CODIST-1-11-EN.pdf >>> >>> If you want to quantify the value of geospatial information in a set of >>> specific processes, take a look at my paper, "GVM: A Framework for >>> Estimating the Business Value of Geospatial Technology Within Information >>> Systems" That paper is available in a few different places. ESRI keeps >>> a >>> copy at >>> >>> http://proceedings.esri.com/library/userconf/geoinfo04/docs/gvm-whitepaper.p >>> df<http://proceedings.esri.com/library/userconf/geoinfo04/docs/gvm-whitepaper.p%0Adf> >>> >>> I've also published a few papers on the business value of various >>> geospatial >>> technologies through IDC, but those tend to be written from a software >>> vendor's perspective. If you want to look at any of those let me know. >>> They >>> are all hanging out on various vendor sites. >>> >>> You raise an interesting question about the value of interactive >>> maps/virtual globes for spatiotemporal analysis. I think you're right. I >>> don't have any research on the value/utility of spatiotemporal analysis, >>> but >>> I think you could extend standard ROI methods to get a useful answer. If >>> you want to pursue that idea, let me know. We could probably sketch out >>> a >>> method pretty quickly. (Doing the research is a whole different deal....) >>> >>> Dave >>> [email protected] >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >>> [email protected] >>> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 12:00 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Geowanking Digest, Vol 8, Issue 15 >>> >>> Send Geowanking mailing list submissions to >>> [email protected] >>> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>> http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>> [email protected] >>> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>> [email protected] >>> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than >>> "Re: Contents of Geowanking digest..." >>> >>> >>> Today's Topics: >>> >>> 1. studies that quantify the benefit of interactive maps and >>> virtual globes? (Tyler Erickson) >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Message: 1 >>> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:39:33 -0400 >>> From: Tyler Erickson <[email protected]> >>> Subject: [Geowanking] studies that quantify the benefit of interactive >>> maps and virtual globes? >>> To: [email protected] >>> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >>> >>> Have there been academic studies that compare static cartographic maps to >>> interactive slippy maps and virtual globes, in term of the quality and >>> quantity of information that can be communicated? I've been searching, >>> but >>> so far the literature seems rather sparse. >>> >>> It seems to me that there is great value in the interactive nature of >>> modern >>> tools, particularly in the ability to quickly change perspective to see >>> both >>> the 'forest', the 'trees', and how they are related. And another area >>> for >>> which the interactive maps/globes seem to shine is in presenting temporal >>> data. But has there been work in recent years to quantify the benefit of >>> this interactivity? >>> >>> I'm mostly interested in representing attributes of objects for which the >>> 3-D location is important (i.e. objects moving in the atmosphere), but >>> any >>> leads on the value of interactive maps are also appreciated. >>> >>> - Tyler >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Geowanking mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org >>> >>> >>> End of Geowanking Digest, Vol 8, Issue 15 >>> ***************************************** >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Geowanking mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Geowanking mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org >> >> > > > -- > Tracey P. Lauriault > 613-234-2805 > https://gcrc.carleton.ca/confluence/display/GCRCWEB/Lauriault >
_______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
