On 29/3/23 14:30, Andrew Harvey wrote:
On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 at 14:05, OSM via Talk-au
<[email protected]> wrote:
Since the coastline tag is also supposed to represent the high
water mark then I would say that they should be snapped together
(since they then represent the same feature - that is, the high
water mark). This would mean that the boundary data already in OSM
from the government basemaps would just be their own mapping of
the high water mark, and probably be less up to date or refined as
our own.
Exactly. So if anything we should be actively snapping them.
I believe this is wrong. For example in NSW...
From
https://rg-guidelines.nswlrs.com.au/deposited_plans/natural_boundaries/consents_naturalboundaries
"However Crown Lands is not the only owner of land below MHWM. Where
Crown Lands is not the owner of land adjoining the foreshore, consent
must be obtained from the appropriate authority. Some of these include:
* National Parks and Wildlife Service (where tidal waters have been
included in land resumed for state or national parks)"
This is my first time responding on talk-au, lmk if I've messed up
any formatting to link to the original question.
Welcome!
The content looks fine to me.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
