I'm doing some work in the Washington State and noticed some problems along the border between BC and Washington State. I asked for help on the talk-us mailing list.<br><br>I originally though the border was incorrect. However, because the border doesn't track exactly along the 49th parallel there appears to be some administrative areas that don't match up with the actual border. See <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.9803&lon=-121.7579&zoom=12&layers=M" target="_blank">http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.9803&lon=-121.7579&zoom=12&layers=M</a><br>
<br><br>Paul Norman wrote:<br><div class="im">On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Paul Norman <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:penorman@mac.com" target="_blank">penorman@mac.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">The
survey points are based on IBC data (which they view as PD) and are
supposed to be accurate within a few cm and the limits of NAD83 to WGS84
conversion (a few more cm).</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">I’ve
verified a few by the lower mainland with survey and against a few
sources of accurate imagery and their data seems accurate within the
limits of the imagery.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">You can see a clearing along parts of the border in that area so it’s accurate to within 20 meters.</span></p>
</div></div></blockquote></div><div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">I
know that Washington State argued that they were not responsible for
the border costs in Blaine because it was not part of the state since
the state ended at the 49<sup>th</sup> parallel and the border is north of the 49<sup>th</sup> there.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">What I’ll do is go and eliminate duplicate border ways, like I did with the lower mainland.</span></p>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br clear="all">There is a large multipolygon with a source of "CanVec 6.0 - NRCan" that should probably extend to the border. However I'm not sure. I'm wondering if anyone in Canada could investigate. The area is defined as natural=wood. <br>
<br>BTW - I'm using USDA National Forest Services Topo Maps to add in rivers, streams, etc. I see streams coming into the US from BC, but we don't have any corresponding stream in Washington.<br><br>Clifford<br><div>
<br></div>I have promised to cut down on my swearing and drinking, which I have. Unfortunately, this has left me dim-witted and nearly speechless. Adapted from <i>The Lion</i> by Nelson DeMille<div><br></div><div>-or-</div>
<div><br></div><div>If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. Albert Einstein</div><br>