[Talk-us] IR boundary tagging

[Greg Morgan]

I don't mean to offend any one in the tribal nations but I don't really
care about voting aspects of the admin levels in the discussion. This is a
mechanical geometry placement issue in my view.  The Tohono-Oodham and
Glendale Arizona case show just how messed this issue can be in making the
right choice[1]. A tribe near the Mexican border has "annexed" an area in
the middle of Arizona in a savvy business move.  The only voting that will
be going on in this part of the Tohono-Oodham nation[2] is which slot
machine that a person is going to use. What's even more interesting is that
the Tohono-Oodham Nation already owns the four geometries: parcels
142-56-018K, 142-56-018L, 142-56-018M, and 142-56-018N as recorded by
Maricopa County.

If boundary=aboriginal_lands is just an _alias_ for a numerical
representation of a geometry at the same city admin geometry levels in the
OSM scheme of  levels that works for me.  _Analogously_ the Tohono-Oodam
geometry is like a city geometry crossing two county geometries. That
analogy does not mean to take away their voting rights or anything else.
 However, cutting the Indian nation geometries at the state level [3] or at
county level so that the outer state and county geometries of Arizona and
Maricopa county are "deformed" is just plain wrong. It looks like none of
these nation areas are marked in Arizona. For that matter, most of the city
boundaries in several Arizona counties need to be deleted and redrawn
because they are no longer correct.

Regards,
Greg

1
https://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/07/25/tohono-oodham-closer-glendale-casino-tribes-continue-fight-ruling-156037
2 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/33.54954/-112.25915
3 https://gist.github.com/pnorman/30244b2984216285735d#file-arizona-geojson



On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Clifford Snow <clifford at snowandsnow.us>
wrote:

>
> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 10:28 PM, Greg Morgan <dr.kludge.gm at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd say make the changes at the city admin level for these reasons. The
>> tribal nations are viewed by the courts as territories but they tend to act
>> more at the city[4] to county[3] COG [1] level.  The squabbles feel more
>> like cities fighting over annexation issues or building alliances for or
>> against economic development[4].  Based on Paul Norman's nice visualization
>> [2] a city boundary feels like the correct admin level verses cutting areas
>> out of county or state levels. Scottsdale cannot grow to the east[5] and
>> Phoenix cannot grow to the south[6] as if the tribal nations are cities.
>> The tribal nations still have to act at or below the county level to get
>> things done[1][3].
>>
>
> Tribal lands are not cities. Well some are, but only because they are a
> city. But most cover large geographical territories. Categorizing tribal
> lands as city or county, IMHO, is wrong. The reservations are not State (US
> State) controlled lands. However they do work in partnership with the
> states and counties on many fronts.  Native American people have dual
> citizenship. Where they live determines who they can vote for in US
> elections. So where the people reside determines where they vote.
>
> The problem is the admin level boundary doesn't work for tribal lands.
> From previous discussions I understood that we agreed that
> boundary=aboriginal_lands was probably the most suitable compromise. The
> boundary shows tribal lands and the states and county boundaries show where
> people vote.
>
> Paul Johnson, I emphasize with you, but I don't see how we can accommodate
> Domestic Dependant States in the current admin hierarchy.
> boundary=aboriginal_lands.
>
> I just fixed a boundary for the Swinomish Tribe nearby. The previous
> boundary cut right through their casino property. Plus the old boundary did
> not include their water rights. I'd like to do an import of Washington
> Tribal lands in the near future. Only a small number are in OSM. It would
> be great if we could agree on a tagging structure.
>
> Clifford
>
> --
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20140728/fde7f8f5/attachment-0001.html>