[Tagging] Tagging of State Parks in the US

Kevin Kenny kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com
Mon Jul 29 23:14:37 UTC 2019

On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 6:02 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
<dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 29. Jul 2019, at 16:37, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com> wrote:
> > There are other historic sites embedded in the park....
> are all these sites mentioned to be part of the state park, or do they simply happen to be within the boundaries?

I'm not sure what you mean by the question.

Many parks over here have 'inholdings', which are other land in the
parks not owned or managed by the park administration. I'm consistent
about mapping those, which is why park boundaries are usually

The sites that I mentioned in Bear Mountain are mostly administered by
the park administration. The inns are operated by a contractor (but
the operator is responsible to the park management), the hiking trails
are maintained by an NGO, and the research reserve is some sort of
cooperative arrangement with NYS Department of Environmental
Conservation and a couple of other government agencies, and I don't
know the all the details. To a visitor, all but the last are 'part of'
the park. (The research reserve has more restricted access, but is
still managed in part by the park under the cooperative agreement.)

The park's boundaries are exactly (well, to within the limits of the
data source, which is not 100% trustworthy, but I verified against
highway, railroad and river alignment, and against a couple of other
data sources for the boundary with West Point) as shown by the
multipolygon https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6467468. The
rights-of-way for the railroad and the highways, and both of the
settlements that I mentioned, are not part of the park, and are cut
out of the multipolygon. I didn't need to use inner ways for those,
simply because they all connect to the world outside, but we do have
protected areas with quite complex topologies indeed:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6365096 is an example and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6362702 is a worse one that
took many hours to map. even with the aid of an import. (I *don't*
just drop imported data in blindly!)  The Fort Montgomery historic
site is technically a separate site (Fort Clinton *is* part of Bear
Mountain State Park), and is mapped thus - but it, Bear Mountain, and
Harriman and Sterling Forest to the west are under common management.

Yes, one of the inn buildings encroaches on the Palisades Parkway
right-of-way. The agencies that administer those two objects are

The concessionaires rent their stalls.

The rest of the historic sites, I've not done the research to see if
they're listed. Many of them are off limits - you're supposed to stay
on trail in the backcountry in that park (because many of the old
industrial sites are still hazardous - they don't want people falling
down mine shafts or being injured by abandoned and decaying
machinery). Doodletown has interpretive signs at a lot of its ruins,
so I wouldn't be surprised to find NRHP listings there, but I haven't
yet looked.

I'm not sure what I'd do with a site relation here. I'd use it, if for
instance, the park had an office occupying part of a building that
wasn't in the park, so I'd need a node for that. I've done site
relations for urban universities that have outreach programs in
off-campus space, but why bother with a site when a multipolygon will

More information about the Tagging mailing list