On Tue, Jan 8, 2019, 11:48 brad I'm going to start close to home, extend that to the state of CO, & see
> how it goes.
> I've done quite a bit of recreating and boondock camping on BLM land and
> I've never come across any that are leased exclusively, altho I'm sure
> there are some.It's more
I'm going to start close to home, extend that to the state of CO, & see
how it goes.
I've done quite a bit of recreating and boondock camping on BLM land and
I've never come across any that are leased exclusively, altho I'm sure
there are some. It's more of a rarity, than 'most of'.
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 10:05 PM Michael Patrick wrote:
> "Multiple uses under BLM management include renewable energy development
> (solar, wind, other); conventional energy development (oil and gas, coal);
> livestock grazing; hardrock mining (gold, silver, other), timber harvesting;
> and
Absolutely agree with your assessment of the management style of the BLM,
Michael. In Alaska, BLM land is literally crisscrossed with ATV trails.
It's a travesty but there's nobody around to enforce the rules and the
amount of land under BLM's "care" is truly humongous. Unmanageable, even
without
> > Joseph, I'm not stuck on class 27, but as you say, that fits the
> definition on the wiki. I should probably look for other specific
> protection in the attributes and translate that somehow. Mostly it's just
> grazing and recreation land. Anything such as wilderness or monument
>
Brad —
My reference to Gaia GPS was meant to illustrate that third party apps are
perfectly capable of overlaying data from various sources. Just because a data
source exists doesn’t mean that it should be in OSM. On the ground
verifiability has always been the gold standard for OSM, and I
On January 6, 2019 at 7:50:44 AM PST, brad wrote:
>
> Joseph, I'm not stuck on class 27, but as you say, that fits the definition
> on the wiki. I should probably look for other specific protection in the
> attributes and translate that somehow. Mostly it's just grazing and
> recreation
On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 21:19:10 -0600
Ian Dees wrote:
> Hi Brad, thanks for proposing this import and posting it here.
>
> I would strongly prefer that we not import boundaries like this into
> OSM. Boundaries of all sorts are almost impossible to verify with
> OSM's "on the ground" rule, but BLM
Joseph, I'm not stuck on class 27, but as you say, that fits the
definition on the wiki. I should probably look for other specific
protection in the attributes and translate that somehow. Mostly it's
just grazing and recreation land. Anything such as wilderness or
monument would
Ian Dees wrote:
>"Those things shouldn't be in OSM either"
Are you implying that because such boundaries (National Forests, National
Parks and National Wildlife Refuges) are non-verifiable by OSM mappers they
don't belong in OSM? If so, wow!
I live in Alaska where about 60% of the land area is
> Clean up as necessary (there are some extraneous ways at state
> boundaries & elsewhere)
BLM manages about 10% of the total area of the United States, and those
areas historically have had the least resources dedicated in terms of
mapping. Also, the BLM data is an amalgamation of data from
Brad — I make use of BLM / NPS / NF boundary data a lot too. I use Gaia GPS for
this, which overlays this data nicely with what’s in OSM[1]. There are lots of
other outdoor apps that do the same. I prefer this data live outside of OSM as
well for similar reasons as Ian stated. Knowing whether
On Sat, Jan 5, 2019 at 10:42 PM Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
> This data is no less verifiable than national forest boundaries and
> federal wilderness boundaries; these generally need to be checked against
> official sources, just as BLM boundaries will.
>
> Municipal boundaries are perhaps even
This data is no less verifiable than national forest boundaries and federal
wilderness boundaries; these generally need to be checked against official
sources, just as BLM boundaries will.
Municipal boundaries are perhaps even harder to verify than boundaries of
BLM land and National Forests in
Ian,
I want to import this data because I think its important for a complete
map. We have national forest, wilderness and national park boundaries
in OSM! This is no different. If you look at many maps they show all
of them.
I'd like it to show up on any map that I use. I'm working
Hi Brad, thanks for proposing this import and posting it here.
I would strongly prefer that we not import boundaries like this into OSM.
Boundaries of all sorts are almost impossible to verify with OSM's "on the
ground" rule, but BLM boundaries in particular are such an edge case (they
have no
I'd like to import BLM (US Bureau of Land Management) boundaries into
OSM. This is not an automated import as you can see from my workflow.
Workflow:
Download shape file from PADUS (1 state at a time):
https://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/data/download/
Load into Qgis and filter for BLM
17 matches
Mail list logo
