The Forgotten Frameworks - NSGIC

NSDI – The Forgotten
Frameworks
NSGIC Annual Meeting
Charleston, South Carolina
September, 2014
Agenda
• Introduction - SDI Land Ownership
Frameworks
• Geodetic Control and Standardized
Reference Systems
• Administrative Boundaries
• Parting Shots
The Birth of the Cat
The Forgotten Frameworks
What the FGDC Didn’t/Still Doesn’t Understand
CADASTRAL
GEODETIC
CONTROL
GOVERNMENTAL
UNITS
Why People Forget
They forget where they put things
GOVERNMENTAL UNITS - 1997
CULTURAL AND DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS, 2008 Geospatially referenced data that describe characteristics of
people: nature of structures in which they live and work;
economic and other activities they pursue; facilities they use
to support their health, recreational, and other needs;
environmental consequences of their presence; boundaries,
names, and numeric codes of geographic entities used to
report information collected.
GOVERNMENTAL UNITS AND ADMINISTRATIVE AND
STATISTICAL BOUNDARIES - 2013
Source – FGDC Publications and Annual Reports
Why People Forget
They think they are done
Fully or Substantially Enabled Counties with Accurate Positioning
Source – 2008 FGDC Annual Report/NGS
Scorecard Survey
Why People Forget
They are bored
Source – Stu Kirkpatrick’s Mind
Why People Forget
They think that things are too big to fail
NGDA Dataset Candidates by Theme as of September 2012. This chart reflects the
proposed combination of the Cultural & Demographic Statistics and the
Governmental Units Themes into a single Theme titled Governmental Units, and
Administrative and Statistical Boundaries
Source – 2012 FGDC Annual Report
The Real Framework
Land Records or Multi-Purpose Cadastre
Control
Cadastral
-Survey
-Photo
Interpreted
-Crowd
Sourced
Boundaries
-Tax Parcels
-Easements
Right of
Ways
Cadastral Reference Grid
-County
-School
-Forest
Service
Control
Nancy Von Meyer
Reference Systems
• Geodetic Control
• Cadastral Reference Grids
•
•
•
•
PLSS – Montana
PLSS – Utah
Eastern states examples
Managing Change
• Other reference systems for boundaries –
physical features, etc.
Multi State Control Database
• Geospatial Control – Points of common
control to tie data themes together and to
reference data to the earth.
• Typically non-geodetic, but valuable
• An aggregation of available control that can be
harvested for a variety of applications
including land records management.
Multi State Control Database
Current Field
Observed Control
Standard Excel
Spreadsheet Capture
Historical Survey and
Control
Documentation
Current Field Observed
Control (may be with a
Data Collector)
Aerial Photography
Captured Control
Other Abstracted
Control Data Files
Manual or web
assisted uploads
Control Point
Submission Database
Web Based Input or
Automated Data
Capture from a data
collector
Web Based Input
Or Standard
Spreadsheet
Submission
Automated
upload
Control Point
Submission Database
Multi State Control Database
One Point at a time –
geoform collection
Project submission
– through the web
or spreadsheet
Multi State Control Database
Control Point
Submission Database
Data review,
projection to common
coordinates,
assignment of global
identifiers
Control Point Staging
Database
The staging database results are displayed on the priority
request web page and is also used for fitness for use
evaluation and harvesting
Priority Areas
Cadastral Reference Grids
CadNSDI Montana and the Montana
CATSPAW Project
Stu Kirkpatrick
What is CadNSDI?
Utah and Montana CadNSDI Today
in many areas is …………
Why State Custodianship of
CadNSDI?
Angry Cat
Every Sick Cat Needs a Vet (or two)
Results
Changing Workflows
Managing Change
The Cat Springs Into Action
Land Records in Utah
Jessica Kirby, State Trust Lands
Bert Granberg, Utah AGRC
Expectations Grow As GIS Products Mature
• Enhanced Data sharing: infrastructure &
processes
• Greater data currency & data quality
“This is great and
all, but what I
really needs is …”
What is the PLSS?
• A system for subdividing & describing
land in the US
• For many states, it’s ‘just’ the
foundation of private land ownership
–
–
–
–
–
–
State Boundaries
Meridian Systems (origin & axes)
Survey Monuments
Townships (6 x 6 mile divisions)
Sections (1 square mile)
Section Divisions (Quarters,
Quarter-Quarters, Special
Surveys, etc)
( GCDB is the PLSS data product )
In short. A High Precision PLSS GCDB is…
• the Key to…
–
–
–
–
–
Survey grade GIS boundary data
Efficiencies in future surveying
Minimizing property & jurisdictional disputes
Better analysis and decision-making
Economic activity
Base Geographic Reference
• Accuracy: geospatial data is only as
accurate as its base reference data
• Downstream ROI: Sharing quality
reference data enhances
EVERYONE’S geospatial data
investment
Aerial
Photography
+
Utah GPS
Reference Network
Public Land
Survey System
(GCDB)
Elevation
Models
State
Geographic
Information
Database
County/City
Boundaries
Ownership
Boundaries
County
Parcels
Utah-specific activity
• County cadastral grants
– Federal / State funding
– Survey PLSS corner monuments
• Real-time GPS base station network (sub cm)
• Digital record of tie-sheet survey records
– Online map for viewing and submission
• State stewardship of Public Lands Ownership
GIS layer
History of Cadastral Program
This process began with an appropriation from the State Legislature
in 1998 and combination of state and federal funds have gone to
the rural counties since then:
Utah State Code – Parcel Rollup
• 63F-1-506. Automated Geographic
Reference Center.
(1) There is created the Automated
Geographic Reference Center as part of the
division.
(2) The center shall:
….
• (vi) coordinate with county recorders and
surveyors to create a statewide parcel layer in
the State Geographic Information Database
containing parcel boundary, parcel identifier,
parcel address, owner type, and county
recorder contact information;
Corner Monuments
PLSS App for Monument Record ‘Tie Sheets’
http://mapserv.utah.gov/PLSS/
How does the program work?
• PLSS is used as a base layer to control other layers
• Physical monuments drive location of boundary on the ground
• Dependencies:
• Municipal, County, Service District boundaries
• and, of course, Parcels (county) and Land ownership (state)
PLSS App - Data Standards
• AGRC aligned with BLM cadastral data standards
• Data standards make it easy to merge into the State
Geographic Information Database (SGID)
Utah’s
RTK System:
TURN
GPS
Network
400+ subscribers
PLSS A-16 Stewardship Activities
• BLM is designated NGDA (A-16) Steward
• BLM oversees enhancement of the Geographic Coordinate Data
Base (GCDB)
– Conducts high precision surveys of ‘corner’ monuments for areas of
interest on public lands
– Contracts for inclusion of high-precision geographic coordinates into
GCDB for surveyed corner ‘monuments’
– Contracts for mathematical adjustments to unsurveyed GCDB corner
points
– Seeks to publish GCDB updates for public use
Land Records in Utah
Land Ownership Status of Utah
State Lead Stewardship is a Cooperative Effort!
SGID10.CADASTRE.LandOwnership
Cooperative Federal and State effort:
•11 years of state and federal cooperation
•The Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA)
revises this data regularly, preforms the GIS adjustments and manages
the cooperative project
•SITLA coordinates State Lands Verification
•BLM coordinates Federal Lands Verification
•Private/ County from parcel roll-up
Open data distribution:
•Weekly updates consumed by State of Utah GIS Clearinghouse-SGID
•Bi-monthly update to BLM – form internal use
Working on a handshake!
Land Ownership Status and Areas of Responsibility for the State of Utah
SGID10.CADASTRE.LandOwnership
*SITLA Layer File (STATE_LGD)
Fields
Highest level owner of parcel
Agency level owner of parcel
Entity with Administrative Jurisdiction of parcel
General land management designation for parcel
SITLA Legend codes
Utah BLM Legend codes
National BLM Legend codes
Federal administrative names
State administrative names
GIS calculated acres
Date of update to parcel
OWNER codes
Sample parcel attributes
Agency may differ from whom administers (ADMIN) the parcel. The Federal BLM office
may lease an area to the Utah State Parks Department for use as a recreational area.
The owner is the federal, the federal agency responsible for the land is the BLM but
the Utah State Parks Department is the administrators of the land because the land
has been designated as a state park and recreation area.
Vertical Alignment
“Nuisance” adjustments” =
Integrated to PLSS Nov 2007
How the Data is Used
Rock Wall Trespass
Road Trespass
Alignment
Quality
Control
CadNSDI
Lack of Confidence
Boundaries
Cadastral
Control
“Houston…”
Deficiencies with PLSS Stewardship
• Under-funded
– Quality control issues
– Too much downstream GIS data is being created
using imprecise GCDB corner data as foundation
• BLM not incorporating local survey control
• Lack of input on ‘areas of interest’ for new
surveys
– Primary focus on BLM and Public Lands
• Nuisance mathematical adjustments = moving
targets
• FGDC cadastral data model is a data
transfer/exchange format, not suitable for direct
use
• Uncertain future commitment
BLM is currently exploring using a GIS for their PLSS
processes: Manipulation, Quality Control, etc…
A new model…?
• BLM stewards GCDB representation of state
boundaries, gathers public land corners
• State opts to maintain GCDB corner point and
PLSS division layers
–
–
–
–
MOU for contributing/supporting users, incl. BLM
Creation of a single access point for tie sheets
Local high precision control incorporated
No more nuisance adjustments
• GCDB and Public Land ownership layers
maintained in a single database as an integrated
‘fabric’ in a GIS
Follow up
Jessica Kirby, jessicakirby@utah.gov
Bert Granberg, bgranberg@utah.gov
Administrative Boundaries
Shonin Anacker and Erin Fashoway
Federal Agencies & Boundaries
• National Boundary Group
• U.S. Census Bureau (BOC):
•
•
•
•
Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS)
Administrative Boundary Programs
Cadastral Pilot Project
Boundary Quality Assessment and
Reconciliation Project (BQARP)
55
What is the Boundary and Annexation
Survey (BAS)?
• A voluntary survey of local, county, state, and tribal
governments
• Conducted annually to collect information about legal
geographic areas
• Primary source of information for:
– Legal boundaries and boundary changes
– Names, functional statuses, and types of governments
– New governments
– Dissolved governments
– Higher-level geographic relationships
• e.g. a place annexes into a new county
56
BQARP Scope
States
Counties
Incorporated Places
Minor Civil Divisions
Title I School Districts (with approval of state
Title I coordinator)
• Public Lands
•
•
•
•
•
Incorporated Places
• Legally bounded entities
• Depending on the state, incorporated
places may be called cities, boroughs,
towns, and villages
• For the 2010 Decennial Census there
were 19,540 reported incorporated places
58
Popular Conception of Place: Local Conception
vs Legal Boundaries
59
Minor Civil Divisions
Public Lands: For Census Use
Cass County, North Dakota – One Case Study
Feature Type
Percentage
PLSS only
8%
Parcel
42 %
Road (Frontage) and
PLSS coincident with
Road
37 %
Hydro
13 %
The PLSS and Roads are often
coincident which accounts for the low
percentage of PLSS Only coincidence
62
Current TIGER Place Boundary Compared to
Local Parcel Data
Blue = Census Boundary for
Great Falls
Red = State of Montana
Boundary for Great Falls
Orange = Parcel
Census clearly leaves out
parcels that include
Housing Units= population
63
Current TIGER Place Boundary Compared to
PLSS Data
Blue = Census Boundary for
Big Water, UT
Red = State of Utah
Boundary for Big Water
Purple = PLSS
Census clearly leaves out
parcels that include
Housing Units= population
Challenges
Spatial
Accuracy vs
Currency
BQARP Schedule
Phase 1 (2014)
Alaska
Montana
Utah
District of Columbia
Hawaii
Phase 2 (2015)
Washington
North Dakota
Maine
Oregon
New Jersey
Nevada
Indiana
Virginia
Kentucky
Arizona
New Mexico
Minnesota
North Carolina
Arkansas
Louisiana
Florida
Phase 3 (2016)
Tennessee
Idaho
Wisconsin
New York
Wyoming
Iowa
Pennsylvania
Connecticut
California
Ohio
Colorado
Kansas
Delaware
Maryland
Alabama
Georgia
Phase 4 (2017)
Michigan
South Dakota
New Hampshire
Vermont
Nebraska
Massachusetts
Illinois
Rhode Island
West Virginia
Missouri
Oklahoma
Texas
South Carolina
Mississippi
MT Administrative Boundaries
Administrative Boundaries
Administrative Boundaries are legally
documented and attributed jurisdictional
boundaries. These boundaries define the rights
and interests on the land. Ensuring that
boundaries, any boundary in the state of
Montana, are correctly recorded and drawn is
essential for several reasons
Administrative Boundaries
• Legal: Establishing well-defined, consistent boundaries minimizes legal
irregularities.
• Equitable collection/distribution of funds: Fees, taxes, or grants
are associated with a defined area (e.g., fire district).
• Equitable distribution of benefits: boundary lines define benefit
areas (e.g., public water/sewer districts).
• Mapping: Accurate boundary lines are used in creating paper maps,
delivering online spatial-based services, and in public policy decision-making.
• “Bad” geography: Many new districts rely on existing, erroneous district
boundary lines, thus producing a domino effect of inaccurate information.
• Public knowledge: Public information on district boundary legal
descriptions and their corresponding maps should be correct and dependable.
Elements of the Administrative
Boundaries Framework
Name
Status
Steward
BQARP
State
Complete
MSL
Yes
County
Complete
MSL
Yes
City/Town
Complete
MSL
Yes
Fire Districts
Complete
DNRC
No
Indian Reservations
Complete
MSL
No
School District
Complete
MSL
Yes
Tax Increment Financing
District
Complete
MSL/DOR
No
Announce
update
schedule
Publish data
Create new or
edit existing
data
Boundary
Workflow
Gather legal
descriptions
and/or GIS
data
Gather tabular
information
Vertical Integration
•
•
•
•
•
Public Land Survey System
Parcels
Physical Features
Survey point controlled boundary
Other
How Does it All Line Up?
Montana Boundary Layers Participating in the
Census Boundary Quality Project:
Feature
Percentage
PLSS
71.92%
Physical Feature
21.81%
Survey Control
4.12%
Parcel
1.83%
Other feature
.33%
Discrepancies & Improvements
Canada
ND
MT
Municipal Boundary Adjustment
Multiple Administrative
Boundaries Adjusted
CATSPAW
• Using the state maintained Cadastral and
Public Land Survey System Data
• Automated adjustments with the use of Esri
tool: the Parcel Fabric
• Boundaries will maintain vertical integration
harmoniously
• Did I mention, automated?
Adjustments in the Parcel Fabric
• PLSS township and
section lines
• County Boundary
• Elementary
• Secondary
• Unified (K-12)
What does this mean for States?
• Frequent adjustments to the CADNSDI
• Better data
• Less gaps between US Census Bureau data and
State produced data.
• Trust in products produced with CADNSDI
• More time for other projects
Lessons and Reflections
• Getting the Boundaries Right Matters
– Public/Private Ownership
– Administrative Boundaries
• Boundaries need to be tied to an underlying
framework that is managed and has good
stewardship.
• There is no Magic Button. We are the Magic.
Questions
Vertical Integration of CatDog