# Presentation: 507887

##   A case study using the cadastral data content standard

**Data Content for Marine Boundaries:**
** **** **A case study using the cadastral data content standard
- for the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary
- David Stein, TPMC/CSC
- Mitchell Tartt, NMSP

**Notes:**
This is a brand new working group started in January of 2001.
 Started out of the need to start addressing boundary issues  

## Presentation Outline

**Presentation Outline**

**1)  Existing Standards**
**Cadastral Data Content Standard**
**Application of Cadastral Standard**
- Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary
**Metadata and documentation**
**Next steps**
**Discussion**

## Existing standards

**Cadastral Data Content Standard – Cadastral Subcommittee**
- Provides common definitions and attributes for cadastral and marine cadastral information found in public records which will faciliate use and understanding of land and submerged land records.
**Governmental Unit Boundary Data Exchange Standard – FGDC Subcommittee for Cultural and Demographic Data**
- Establishes the content requirement for the collection and interchange of governmental unit and other legal entity boundary data.
**IHO Transfer Standard for Digital Hydrographic Data – S-57**
**To be used as the exchange and content standard for digital hydrographic data.**

## Cadastral Data Content Standard

- Pros
- Endorsed by the FGDC in 1996
- Nationally recognized
- Contains most of the elements that are needed to create offshore boundary data
- Flexible in interpretation
- Cons
- To be determined

## Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary

- Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary

## OCNMS Boundary I

- Designation Process - Environmental Impact statement
- Boundary alternatives and preferred alternative
- Terms of designation - Boundary definition
- Code of Federal Regulations
- 	The Sanctuary boundary extends from Koliath Point due north to the United States/Canada international boundary. The Sanctuary boundary then follows the U.S./Canada boundary seaward to the 100 fathom isobath.  The seaward boundary of the Sanctuary approximates the 100 fathom isobath in a southerly direction from the U.S. Canada international boundary to a point due west of the mouth of the Copalis River cutting across the heads of Nitnat, Juan de Fuca and Quinault Canyons. .........

**Notes:**
Sanctuary goes through a designation process.
There’s and environmental impact statement that’s created out of that process.
Several boundary alternatives are created.
One is picked based on consensus.
That one is written into the CFR and the boundary becomes legal.

--This is where we come in...to create the digital boundary.  You define it legally and we map it.

## OCNMS Boundary II

- Outer boundary
- US Territorial limit  / Canadian Border
- 100 fathom isobath
- Inner boundary
- Mean Higher High Water
- Mean Lower Low Water
- Federally managed lands
- Indian reservations
- State and county managed lands
- La Push Harbor

**Notes:**
CFR for Olympic coast describes the outer and inner boundary.

## Data Needed to Construct Boundary

**Data Needed to Construct Boundary**

| Data Set  | Best Available Source |
| --- | --- |
| 1) Seaward boundary coordinates | Code of Federal Regulation |
| 2) Mean Higher High Water | NOAA OCS Extracted Vector Shoreline |
| 3) Mean Lower Low Water | Shoreward extent of Indian Reservations |
| 4) Indian Reservations | Wash. Department of Ecology |
| 5) Colreg Line for La Push Harbor | NOAA Chart |

**Notes:**
Often map sources are in conflict.  NOAA, with a mission to provide for safe navigation develops charts with an emphasis on issues important to the mariner, mapping the shoreline at its lowest vertical datum and often not mapping up rivers.  USGS is more focused on the land-based resources, where

## OCNMS Seaward Boundary:Coordinates

**OCNMS Seaward Boundary:**Coordinates

- The Sanctuary boundary extends from Koliath Point due north to the United States/Canada international boundary. The Sanctuary boundary then follows the U.S./Canada
- boundary seaward to the 100 fathom isobath.  The seaward
- boundary of the Sanctuary approximates the 100 fathom
- isobath in a southerly direction from the U.S. Canada international boundary to a point due west of the mouth of the Copalis River cutting across the heads of Nitnat, Juan de Fuca and Quinault Canyons.
**Source**: U.S. Code of Federal Regulations

**Notes:**
Often map sources are in conflict.  NOAA, with a mission to provide for safe navigation develops charts with an emphasis on issues important to the mariner, mapping the shoreline at its lowest vertical datum and often not mapping up rivers.  USGS is more focused on the land-based resources, where

## OCNMS Coastal Boundary I:MHHW and MLLW

**OCNMS Coastal Boundary I:**MHHW and MLLW

- The coastal boundary of the
- Sanctuary is the _**mean higher **_
_**high water**_ line when adjacent to
- Federally managed lands cutting
- across the mouths of all rivers and
- streams, except where adjacent to
- Indian reservations, State and County owned lands; in such case, the coastal boundary is the _**mean lower low water line**_.
**Data Sources**: NOAA OCS Coastal Map/Extracted Vector Shoreline; Washington State Department of Ecology Indian Reservation data
**Scale**: 1:180K ; 1:100K

**Notes:**
Often map sources are in conflict.  NOAA, with a mission to provide for safe navigation develops charts with an emphasis on issues important to the mariner, mapping the shoreline at its lowest vertical datum and often not mapping up rivers.  USGS is more focused on the land-based resources, where

## OCNMS Coastal Boundary II:Indian Reservations

**OCNMS Coastal Boundary II:**Indian Reservations

- The coastal boundary of the
- Sanctuary is the mean higher
- high water line when adjacent to
- Federally managed lands cutting
- across the mouths of all rivers and
- streams, except where adjacent to
_**Indian reservations**_, State and County owned lands; in such case, the coastal boundary is the _**mean lower low water line**_.
**Data Sources**: Washington State Department of Ecology Indian Reservation data
**Scale**: 1:100K

**Notes:**
Often map sources are in conflict.  NOAA, with a mission to provide for safe navigation develops charts with an emphasis on issues important to the mariner, mapping the shoreline at its lowest vertical datum and often not mapping up rivers.  USGS is more focused on the land-based resources, where

## OCNMS Coastal Boundary III:La Push Harbor (Colreg Line)

**OCNMS Coastal Boundary III:**La Push Harbor (Colreg Line)

- La Push harbor is excluded from the Sanctuary shoreward of the International Collision at Sea Regulation (Colreg.) demarcation lines.
**Data Sources**: NOAA Chart 18480_2
**Scale**: 1:10K

**Notes:**
Often map sources are in conflict.  NOAA, with a mission to provide for safe navigation develops charts with an emphasis on issues important to the mariner, mapping the shoreline at its lowest vertical datum and often not mapping up rivers.  USGS is more focused on the land-based resources, where

## Slide 13

## Cadastral Data Content Standard:Database Construction

**Cadastral Data Content Standard:**Database Construction

-  **Data content sources**:  _Cadastral Data Content Standard_; _NMS Boundary Project_
-  **Data format: **ArcView** **Shapefile
-  **Entity**: National Marine Sanctuary Boundary (OCNMS)
-  **Feature Types**:  Polyline, Polygon
-  **Attributes included from the Cadastral Data Content Standard:**
-  record bounds | legal status | map unit | source type | source agent | source comment | distance unit | distance type | measurement method | ***others?***
-  **Attributes created for the NMSP Boundary Project:**
-  scale | datum | feature | notes | length | area | start | end |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |

**Notes:**
Often map sources are in conflict.  NOAA, with a mission to provide for safe navigation develops charts with an emphasis on issues important to the mariner, mapping the shoreline at its lowest vertical datum and often not mapping up rivers.  USGS is more focused on the land-based resources, where

## Metadata

**Metadata**

- FGDC compliant
- Methodology captured in _Process Description_
**   ****Process_Description:**
-          The geographic boundary coordinates listed within the United States Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) were converted to decimal degrees in NAD83 and a text file was created. A line coverage was then generated using ArcINfo GIS. The coverage was projected into the Geographic Coordinate System and overlaid on large-scale nautical charts to check for accuracy.  To create the coastal boundary of the OCNMS, the following processing steps were used:
- 	1) Obtained vector shorelines from the NOAA Office of Coast Survey for largest scale charts.  The following charts were used: Cape Flattery (1:40000), Columibia River to Destruction Island (1:180000), and Destruction Island to Amphitate Point (1:176000).
-           2) Obtained Indian Reservation data from the Washington State Department of Ecology at a scale of 1:100000.
-           3) The data were converted to decimal degrees, NAD83 and added to an ArcView project.
-           4) Straight line segments were digitized between the MHW (vector shoreline) and the MLW (Indian Reservations) to connect the shorelines.
-           5) Straight lines were digitized to close rivers and streams along the coastal boundary of the OCNMS.
-           6) The COLREG line was digitized from the 1:10000 scale Quillayate River Entrance Chart as described in the CFR.
-           7) The resulting data set was manually QA/QC'd to remove overshoots and undershoots,  then cleaned and built for topology.
-           8) The line segments of the polyline file were then attributed using standard field names and domains.
- Attributes fully described in _Entity and Attribute Information _section

**Notes:**
Often map sources are in conflict.  NOAA, with a mission to provide for safe navigation develops charts with an emphasis on issues important to the mariner, mapping the shoreline at its lowest vertical datum and often not mapping up rivers.  USGS is more focused on the land-based resources, where

## Next Steps

**Next Steps**

- Finalize remainder of NMS digital boundaries.
- Work with MBWG and Cadastral Subcommittee to refine/customize data content for marine boundaries.
- Develop data model, implementation guidelines for marine boundaries
- Best Practices Handbook

**Notes:**
Often map sources are in conflict.  NOAA, with a mission to provide for safe navigation develops charts with an emphasis on issues important to the mariner, mapping the shoreline at its lowest vertical datum and often not mapping up rivers.  USGS is more focused on the land-based resources, where

## Questions

- Is there anything missing from this customized application of the Cadastral Data Content Standard?
- Should anything be formally added to the CS to address data content for marine boundaries?
- Does this type of methodology and documentation bring us closer to having compatible and user friendly boundary files?

**Notes:**
Historical Perspective: U.S. law (and also some international law) can be traced back to 6th century Roman civil law that stated that the sea and the shores of the sea were to be held as common areas.  Following the Magna Carta, much of the Roman law was adopted by English common law, and certain submerged lands were held in “public trust by the king for the benefit of all English subjects."  These basic principles have survived the American Revolution, and with slight modifications have become the basis of U.S. property law in the marine environment.  (Reed, 2000; The Coastal State Organization, 1997).  This body of law and its practice is often referred to as the Public Trust Doctrine, and these lands are often referred to as public trust lands.  These may include: navigable lakes and rivers as well as the coastal belt between mean high and mean low water lines (i.e., the beach).  In the U.S., the issue of states’ rights further complicates the delineation of public trust lands.  As a result, there are many different state interpretations of what constitutes public trust lands. 
State Claims: Generally under U.S. law, upland private ownership extends to the MHW line.  In some states, however, private rights will only extend to MHHW (e.g., Texas) or in some cases down to the MLW (e.g., Delaware) line.  The selection of these seaward boundaries (tidal datums) has a relationship to when the individual states entered the Union.  Seaward of this line are the public trust lands that are managed by the state or federal government.  In most cases, the individual coastal state has control of the sea bottom and marine resources from mean high water out to the state’s seaward boundary at 3 nautical miles from the coast line (43 U.S.C. § 1312, unless reserved by the federal government, § 1313).  As described in the UNCLOS, the federal government has sovereign rights over all living and nonliving resources out to the extent of the continental shelf and EEZ.  Like many laws, there are exceptions to the rules.  In some states and commonwealths (e.g., Texas, Puerto Rico, Gulf coast of Florida) the state has jurisdiction over the natural resources out to 3 marine leagues (9 nautical miles).  Within this area, states have the authority to manage, administer, lease, develop, and use the natural resources of the ocean; and the federal government retains control over commerce, navigation, defence, fisheries, and international matters. The Magnuson Act gives the states primary responsibility over fisheries within the state seaward boundary, with a federal override if conservation needs are not being met.  
bilateral Boundaries: Bilateral boundaries are boundaries between adjacent states extending from the shore to their seaward boundary or boundaries between adjacent.

## For Additional Information:

**For Additional Information:**
**David Stein**
**	****NOAA Coastal Services Center**
**	****Dave.Stein@noaa.gov**
**Mitchell Tartt**
**	****National Marine Sanctuary Program**
**	****Mitchell.Tartt@noaa.gov**

## Discussion...

**Discussion...**