[Talk-us] Native American Reservations
Hello All, Has anyone done any work (or know of areas/examples), of mapping on Native American reservations? I know some people who work with Native American groups, and are intersted in OSM. I haven't seen much in the wiki, or on the map. I have seen some ares defined by nodes imported with the GNIS, but doesn't seem to be too much. Thanks, Sarah ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
[Talk-us] Native American Reservations
Boundaries for US aboriginal reservations are available from the 2008 Tiger Shapefile Website. http://www2.census.gov/cgi-bin/shapefiles/national-files <>___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Native American Reservations
Sarah, I've done some in the Olympic Peninsula of Washington http://osm.org/go/WJAdYCYM-- I'm currently using boundary=native_nation, there aren't good rendering rules for it, and I'm not convinced that's how it should be (maybe boundary=administrative, admin=3 ?, border_type=native_nation ?) My thinking is that boundary=native_nation is relatively clear, and once more mapping has been done in the US, Canada, Australia, etc. I can go through and change all the boundary=native_nation to be whatever it should be. Until that time, landcover, landuse, roads, buildings, POIs, rivers, lakes, routes etc. can all be added within an as yet unrendered boundary. -Tyler On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Sarah Manley wrote: > Hello All, > > Has anyone done any work (or know of areas/examples), of mapping on Native > American reservations? I know some people who work with Native American > groups, and are intersted in OSM. I haven't seen much in the wiki, or on the > map. I have seen some ares defined by nodes imported with the GNIS, but > doesn't seem to be too much. > > Thanks, > Sarah > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Native American Reservations
the wiki has them as proposal on boundary=adminstrative, admin level 1, but this is definitely wrong. they should be either level 3 - 5. as far as I know they have a pretty special legal status and level 3 seems to be a good choice.an adminsitrative boundary should always render. For more details a tag like native_nation is a good idea too. the discussion page has some other ideas which are a bit discrimiating and native_nation is the best choice. haven't searched for Native American reservations data but there should be something available. If someone knows where to get it and what tags to use it can be done quickly -- Apo On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Tyler wrote: > Sarah, > I've done some in the Olympic Peninsula of Washington > http://osm.org/go/WJAdYCYM-- I'm currently using boundary=native_nation, > there aren't good rendering rules for it, and I'm not convinced that's how > it should be (maybe boundary=administrative, admin=3 ?, > border_type=native_nation ?) My thinking is that boundary=native_nation is > relatively clear, and once more mapping has been done in the US, Canada, > Australia, etc. I can go through and change all the boundary=native_nation > to be whatever it should be. > > Until that time, landcover, landuse, roads, buildings, POIs, rivers, lakes, > routes etc. can all be added within an as yet unrendered boundary. > > -Tyler > > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Sarah Manley wrote: > >> Hello All, >> >> Has anyone done any work (or know of areas/examples), of mapping on Native >> American reservations? I know some people who work with Native American >> groups, and are intersted in OSM. I haven't seen much in the wiki, or on the >> map. I have seen some ares defined by nodes imported with the GNIS, but >> doesn't seem to be too much. >> >> Thanks, >> Sarah >> >> ___ >> Talk-us mailing list >> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us >> >> > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Native American Reservations
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 5:10 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote: > the wiki has them as proposal on boundary=adminstrative, admin level 1, but > this is definitely wrong. they should be either level 3 - 5. as far as I > know they have a pretty special legal status and level 3 seems to be a good > choice. I think that admin level 1 has merits. The Akwesasne First Nation[1] includes parts of Ontario, Quebec and New York, including a CanAm border crossing. Canadians and Americans must stop at border control in Akwesasne as they pass between Canada and USA. Akwesasne citizens are exempt, and can pass through without stopping. Their geography is unusual and a "Jurisdictional nightmare"[2]. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akwesasne [2] http://www.akwesasne.ca/ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Native American Reservations
> > haven't searched for Native American reservations data but there should be > something available. If someone knows where to get it and what tags to use > it can be done quickly Apo, http://nationalatlas.gov/mld/indlanp.html it's not really the most accurate data (as with most of the national atlas) but it would be a good start. I think that admin level 1 has merits. The Akwesasne First Nation[1] includes > parts of Ontario, Quebec and New York, including a CanAm border crossing. > Canadians and Americans must stop at border control in Akwesasne as they > pass between Canada and USA. Akwesasne citizens are exempt, and can pass > through without stopping. That makes it sound like a admin_level=3 would be appropriate. As the citizens from the admin_level=2 are still stopping (I would expect admin_level=1 to supercede all lower levels) and in the US native lands are considered semi soverign while still operating within the federal government and state boundaries. my 2 cents. But as you say "Jurisdictional nightmare" My cold-clouded position (the weather isn't even changing, stupid rhinovirus!) is, import the US fed atlas data as boundary=administrative admin_level=3 boundary_type=native_nation or boundary_type=aboriginal_land do the same for Canada (is it in the CanVec data?) if there's a big problem with admin_level, change it later. Then people can go through and edit the boundaries as appropriate but they will at least have something to work with. -Tyler ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Native American Reservations
On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 14:10 -0700, Apollinaris Schoell wrote: > the wiki has them as proposal on boundary=adminstrative, admin level > 1, but this is definitely wrong. they should be either level 3 - 5. as > far as I know they have a pretty special legal status and level 3 > seems to be a good choice. At what level are states considered again? Effectively, many (all?) reservations operate effectively as their own state. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Native American Reservations
states are admin_level 4 but we shouldn't use the same level as it is still different. As it is below federal level but not below state level I think 3 is the best choice as Tyler suggested already. for the very special case Richard had mentioned a special tag can be applied or admin_level=1 as suggested on the wiki But even they themselves consider them below federal level, "Because of our geographic uniqueness, we have to lobby not just the Federal Government but also two provincial governments." And if their status will change to an independent nation OSM will be the first to have it changed. On 1 Sep 2009, at 20:55 , Paul Johnson wrote: > On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 14:10 -0700, Apollinaris Schoell wrote: >> the wiki has them as proposal on boundary=adminstrative, admin level >> 1, but this is definitely wrong. they should be either level 3 - 5. >> as >> far as I know they have a pretty special legal status and level 3 >> seems to be a good choice. > > At what level are states considered again? Effectively, many (all?) > reservations operate effectively as their own state. > > > ___ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us