[Talk-us] National Wetlands Inventory

Randal Hale rjhale at northrivergeographic.com
Thu Aug 12 18:05:31 BST 2010


  It's been my experience way back when in a past life that the Wetlands 
Inventory (while busier and therefore appears to have more data) really 
wasn't all that great spatially. We would use it for a reference for 
mapping - as in "there should be a wetland here" and then interpret the 
correct location of the wetland. I would just use it as a reference and 
use the NHD..

Randy

-- 
Randal Hale, GISP
North River Geographic Systems, Inc.
ESRI Business Partner and Authorized Trainer
http://www.northrivergeographic.com
http://wordpress.northrivergeographic.com
423.653.3611 rjhale at northrivergeographic.com



On 8/12/2010 12:40 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
> Hmm. It sounds like we want the "routability" of the NHD reach-code 
> system with the accuracy and completeness of the Wetland Inventory.
>
> I wonder if there's some "gotcha" in the FWS dataset that would make 
> it inappropriate to use. For example, I see a lot of freshwater areas 
> that are really inundation/flood control areas in my area. It would be 
> difficult for an import to tell the difference between those two things.
>
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Steven Johnson <sejohnson8 at gmail.com 
> <mailto:sejohnson8 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     I'm not an expert on either of these data sets, but I know enough
>     to say that USGS sponsored the development of the NHD, largely to
>     replace the old digital line graph (DLG) products. NHD serves as a
>     multi-purpose inventory of surface waters, grouped by watershed.
>     OTOH, FWS sponsored development of Natl Wetlands Inventory,
>     largely as a basis for habitat suitability. The data may overlap,
>     but they serve two different purposes/missions.
>
>     SEJ
>     ----
>     "Wretches, utter wretches, keep your hands from beans." -Empedocles
>
>
>
>     On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 12:12, Ian Dees <ian.dees at gmail.com
>     <mailto:ian.dees at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         I wonder if our friends at the USGS know about this data. If
>         they do, there must be a good reason why they aren't using it
>         for NHD, since I was under the impression that NHD was the
>         authoritative dataset for waterways in the US.
>
>
>         On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Nathan Edgars II
>         <neroute2 at gmail.com <mailto:neroute2 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>             I'm wondering if anyone has any experience with the
>             National Wetlands
>             Inventory: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/
>             At first glance it looks like better-quality data than the
>             NHD for
>             both wetlands and water.
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Talk-us mailing list
>         Talk-us at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
>         http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20100812/4dbb4220/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list