|
|
GIS Online |
|
|
|
Products |
|
|
Great Lakes Information Network
|
|
|
|
Questions? |
|
Comments or questions about the GIS Online project? Contact at
|
|
|
|
Great Lakes
Regional Data Exchange
July 8th Data Exchange Conference Summary
Great Lakes Regional Geospatial
Data Exchange Conference
Tuesday, July 8, 2003
9:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m.
Conference Site:
Great Lakes Commission
Eisenhower Corporate Park
2805 S. Industrial Hwy, Suite 100
Ann Arbor, MI 48104-6791 [map]
(734) 971-9135
Webcast facilities courtesy of:
US Fish and Wildlife Service
National Conservation Training Center
Attendees List
Conference Summary
The conference summary consists of an updated agenda with hyperlinks
to powerpoint presentations, an edited chatroom log from the webcast,
and meeting notes taken from the wrap-up and "key questions"
period (thanks to Chris Stewart for recording these).
Presentation
Welcome
(M. Donahue, GLC)
Introduction
(R. Gauthier, GLC)
Rules of Order/Technical
Notes
(S. Eddy, GLC)
Presentation
LOSLRS
Framework Data Project
(J. Ehman, Pangaea)
Presentation
Web
Mapping Demonstration/Discussions
(K. Yam, GLC / M. Robertson, OMNR / A. Plante,
EC-QU)
Presentation
IJC
Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Study: Lessons Learned
(I. Gillespie, EC-ON / A. Plante, EC-QU)
Presentation
Regional
Data Exchange Considerations
(R. Gauthier, GLC/USACE)
Discussion/Comments
| Jeff Herter: (responding to a comment about multi-jurisdictional data sharing
agreements:)The NY State GIS Data Sharing Cooperative is multijurisdictional,
including VT, PA, NJ and a number of federal agencies. |
| Roger Barlow: Is the LOSLR LIDAR distributable yet? From mapserver.glc.org?
|
[Lunch]
Presentation
Lake
Huron Initiative
(M. Mackay, MDNR)
Discussion
| Wisconsin ERSC: How many external drives are
needed for the Lake Huron data? How much money is involved? |
| Mark Mackay: We've been recommending 120 GB
units so people end up with some extra space. The data itself is
something over 40 GB. 120 GB external drives run about $250. |
| NRRI GIS Group: Who is eligible for the Huron
GIS data? |
| Mark Mackay: Eligibility depends on the data
sharing agreement. So far, sharing has been okay for those who've
asked. |
Presentation
USGS
Initiatives / Lake Erie Aquatic GAP
(C. Hickman / D. Myers, USGS; presented by D. Myers)
Discussion
| Tom Hollenhorst: Where did the substrate classification
come from? |
| [Answer?] |
| Wisconsin ERSC: Regarding the National Map:
"continuous revision" is a scary term for those of us who study
change over time. Is there an effort to archive snapshots for future
historical comparison? |
| Donna Myers: Archives are one of the USGS's
mandates. Dated versions of each product will remain available. |
| Brian Huberty: For the WI ERSC question, it
all depends on how USGS structures its database. Using NWI for example,
we will be versioning our data starting this year using Oracle and
an Arc MGB structure. |
| [Question]: What does 'MGB' stand for? |
| Brian Huberty: Arc MGB = Master Geodata Base |
| Irvin Goldblatt: Are there plans to incorporate
the Aquatic GAP with the existing GAP projects in states? |
| [Answer?] |
| Irvin Goldblatt: Do you also consider private
lands that are set aside for preservation? |
| [Answer?] |
| Jeff_Herter : What if any work/data has been
done for the New York portion of Lake Erie...substrate data ? opportunities
for additional partners ? I'm interested in the Eastern Lake Ontario
pilot. |
Presentation
Lake
Michigan On-Line Atlas
(S. Eddy, GLC)
Discussion
| Wisconsin ERSC: Is most of the data land data or water data? If land,
maybe a better name. |
| Stuart Eddy: It's mostly land data, so good point - maybe the funders
could be talked into 'Lake Michigan Basin Online Atlas'. |
Presentation
Lake
Superior Decision Support Project
(G. Host, UM-D)
Discussion
| Tom McAuley: Approx. 17,000 km of coast in
both countries. |
Presentation
Open
discussion on development of regional exchange agreements
Notes
1. Is a regional data exchange agreement
necessary?
| |
Yes |
No |
| Ann Arbor |
15 |
3 |
| Webcast |
13 |
1 |
| Total |
28 |
4 |
Stated reasons for a 'No' vote:
- To get an all-encompassing agreement may not work — too many data types.
- People will share data anyway if important — why formalize?
- Issues with Canadian Government policies — data not as free, figuratively
and literally; cost recovery.
- What does does Regional data exchange mean? How is it defined? What
would it cover?
- "Necessary"-NO, "Useful"-YES
Discussion
| Wisconsin ERSC: No and Yes. "Necessary?" for
whom? |
| NRRI GIS Group: Yes, when necessary —
otherwise adding additional bureaucratic layers... |
| Jeff Herter: I disagree with the implication
that agreements are limited....should be a data sharing cooperative
that is open ended and can add organizations and their data as they
become aware of the effort. |
| Brian Huberty: One opinion: the real purpose
for agreements is to leverage funding and support for partners |
| Brian Huberty: Cost recovery with copyrights
does not work according to Manitoba GIS'ers |
| Jeff Herter: NY is running into data restriction
issues due to Homeland Security issues...we are constantly working
to get data released from the clutches of Security type folks |
| Wisconsin ERSC: Agreements can provide targets
for standards and metadata, but not enforcement |
| Jeff Herter: See http://www.nysgis.state.ny.us/datacoop.htm
|
| Wisconsin ERSC: We took issue with the term
"necessary." Useful, yes. |
| Ulf Gafvert: At best, data should reside with
stewards, but needs to be available to others more freely than currrently
|
Notes
2. Would you participate in its governance?
| |
Yes |
No |
| Ann Arbor |
8 |
3 |
| Webcast |
9 |
3 |
| Total |
17 |
6 |
Discussion
| Wisconsin_ERSC: Too vague to really answer.
Are we talking about a particular clearinghouse or individual nodes
or what? |
| Ulf Gafvert: No to data sharing costs, except
in limited instances |
| Wisconsin ERSC: For some of us "Yes" for others
"No" — It depends on which datasets are at issue. |
Notes
3. Would you support ISO metadata standards?
| |
Yes |
No |
| Ann Arbor |
12 |
2 |
| Webcast |
13 |
1 |
| Total |
25 |
3 |
Comments:
- Why ISO and not FGDC? Answer: They are close, but the region includes
the United States and Canada, so emphasis on international seemed appropriate.
- No, New York State has its own standard. Certain elements of FGDC did not fit,
so revisions were made to suit New York State's needs.
- Bilingual requirements? Would there be any given Canadian regulations?
Discussion
| NRRI GIS Group: Would ISO require bilingual
standards? |
Notes
4. Would data access fees be necessary?
| |
Yes |
No |
| Ann Arbor |
1 |
12 |
| Webcast |
2 |
14 |
| Total |
3 |
26 |
Comments:
- No to data sharing costs
- US federal agencies can charge duplication fees but cannot charge cost recovery
- Mike Robertson: LIO data exchange created - charge a membership fee to
distribution/subscription if not charging for data.
- Sensitive data are restricted
Discussion
| Wisconsin ERSC: Too vague to really answer.
Are we talking about a particular clearinghouse or individual nodes
or what? |
| Ulf Gafvert: No to data sharing costs, except
in limited instances |
| Wisconsin ERSC: For some of us "yes", for
others "no". It depends on which datasets are at issue. |
Notes
5. Would you support distributed web mapping
applications?
| |
Yes |
No |
| Ann Arbor |
15 |
0 |
| Webcast |
15 |
0 |
| Total |
30 |
0 |
Comments:
- National Park Service is interested in partnering with Great Lakes
Network on web mapping applications.
Discussion
| Byron Williams: I would like to hear the argument
in support of charging for data created with federal funds. |
| Jeff Herter: A comment : In NY when the data
sharing cooperative was formed, it resulted in creation of a unit
or branch nested within each existing state agency that is dedicated
almost entirely to serving the coop and it's members |
| Brian Huberty: Comment: Western Great Lakes
Region for ASPRS may be cohosting a GIS conf with MN GIS/LIS in
Oct 2004. Is this of interest? |
| Jeff Herter: Comment : NY has its Annual Statewide
GIS Conference every October as well. |
| Rich Greenwood: Brian, hope it isn't scheduled
the same week as the next SOLEC |
|
![[ GLIN: Great Lakes Information Network ]](/images/GLINpartner.gif)