I'm with Kevin, SteveA, etc, here. In the part of the world that I
live, a map without national forest & BLM boundaries is very
incomplete. A useful OSM needs this. The useful boundary would be
the actual ownership boundary, not the outer potential ownership
boundary. Messy, I know.
On 9/1/20 7:05 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 12:52 AM Bradley White
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 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.
In repeated discussions about the large government-owned
mixed-public-use land areas in the US, people have argued repeatedly
that the boundaries are unverifiable. We've shown references like
https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/gwj/specialplaces/?cid=stelprdb5276999 indicating
that the boundaries are indeed marked, and how they are marked.
Note that that reference distinguishes the proclaimed boundary - the
large region in which the Congress has authorized the National Forest
to exist - from the actual forest land.
Maps commonly show proclaimed national forest boundaries. However,
all land within these boundaries is not national forest land; some
is privately owned. The user is cautioned to comply with state law
and owner's rules when entering onto private land.
This has failed to satisfy. The same individuals continue to contend,
each time the topic comes around, that the boundaries are
unverifiable, and to cling to that contention in the face of this
evidence. In a previous round, one of the people actually advanced the
argument that only each individual sign, blaze, stake or cairn is
verifiable, and that the line that they mark is not verifiable and
ought not to be mapped.
This behaviour convinced me long ago that there is a certain
contingent here, almost entirely comprising people who've never set
foot in a National Forest, who ardently wish to keep US National
Forests and similar lands (e.g., the zoo of New York State
public-access areas, the Pennsylvania State Game Lands, and even our
State Parks) off the map, for reasons that don't touch on
verifiability, but throw verifiability into the pot in an effort to
make a stronger case.
--
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
