Archives
28/03
Contributed by John Milburn
Most of you are probably aware of the proposed legislation in California that would have required "internet mapping sites" to blur images of churches, schools, etc. It is my understanding that the hearing to discuss this bill was canceled earlier this week at the request of the bill's author.
In Missouri, there is proposed legislation that, on its face, at least would limit the use of GIS to anyone but surveyors. Directions magazine details a well-written letter that MAPPS has sent to the state senator who has proposed the legislation.
As the applications for spatial technology increases, so will the amount of legislation attempting to regulate how spatial data is collected, distributed and used. However, much of this legislation will be drafted by policymakers who do not fully understand either the technology or the proposed legislation's overall implications.
Google recently launched its Street View in the UK. According to the BBC, this resulted in requests to have certain images removed. What I don't understand is why the media typically portrays Google's removal of these images in such a negative manner. For example, this article from the BBC website suggests certain images were "mistakes" and states that Google was "forced to pull" images. However, the images were collected from public streets - how are these images a mistake? With respect to the removal of images, it appears to me that Google is doing exactly what people wanted, and what Google has said it will do.
A recent article from Asian Surveying and Mapping on how surveyors are being disciplined, and in some cases sued, in Texas in connection with flood damage that was incurred as a result of Hurricane Ike. According to the article:
"Some of the damage in the US was due to flooding, where housing had been built below the Base Flood Level. This is a contour defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to correspond to a 100-year flood level. The position of the BFL was fixed by the National Geodetic Survey long ago and marked by concrete and brass monuments.
In the 1980s, FEMA re-measured the contour and found that the flood plain was about a meter above the old marks. It issued a new map, which became the document of reference for insurance companies and other authorities.
But no one told the surveyors, and they didn't ask. They continued to rely on the old elevations. This meant that people who thought their new homes were being built above flood level were actually building a meter below it. The practical effect was to allow about 20 homes near the small town of LaBelle to be built in the flood plain. This mattered when Hurricane Ike hit the Texas coast.
Not only were these homes below the flood level and wet, they had no flood insurance. To add to the homeowners' nightmare, FEMA would not permit them to rebuild their homes because they were in the flood plain." (This [story] is a good reason for projects like the IndianaMap).
John Milburn
Hancock County GIS Coordinator
(317) 477-1150
jmilburn@hancockcoingov.org
Most of you are probably aware of the proposed legislation in California that would have required "internet mapping sites" to blur images of churches, schools, etc. It is my understanding that the hearing to discuss this bill was canceled earlier this week at the request of the bill's author.
In Missouri, there is proposed legislation that, on its face, at least would limit the use of GIS to anyone but surveyors. Directions magazine details a well-written letter that MAPPS has sent to the state senator who has proposed the legislation.
As the applications for spatial technology increases, so will the amount of legislation attempting to regulate how spatial data is collected, distributed and used. However, much of this legislation will be drafted by policymakers who do not fully understand either the technology or the proposed legislation's overall implications.
Google recently launched its Street View in the UK. According to the BBC, this resulted in requests to have certain images removed. What I don't understand is why the media typically portrays Google's removal of these images in such a negative manner. For example, this article from the BBC website suggests certain images were "mistakes" and states that Google was "forced to pull" images. However, the images were collected from public streets - how are these images a mistake? With respect to the removal of images, it appears to me that Google is doing exactly what people wanted, and what Google has said it will do.
A recent article from Asian Surveying and Mapping on how surveyors are being disciplined, and in some cases sued, in Texas in connection with flood damage that was incurred as a result of Hurricane Ike. According to the article:
"Some of the damage in the US was due to flooding, where housing had been built below the Base Flood Level. This is a contour defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to correspond to a 100-year flood level. The position of the BFL was fixed by the National Geodetic Survey long ago and marked by concrete and brass monuments.
In the 1980s, FEMA re-measured the contour and found that the flood plain was about a meter above the old marks. It issued a new map, which became the document of reference for insurance companies and other authorities.
But no one told the surveyors, and they didn't ask. They continued to rely on the old elevations. This meant that people who thought their new homes were being built above flood level were actually building a meter below it. The practical effect was to allow about 20 homes near the small town of LaBelle to be built in the flood plain. This mattered when Hurricane Ike hit the Texas coast.
Not only were these homes below the flood level and wet, they had no flood insurance. To add to the homeowners' nightmare, FEMA would not permit them to rebuild their homes because they were in the flood plain." (This [story] is a good reason for projects like the IndianaMap).
John Milburn
Hancock County GIS Coordinator
(317) 477-1150
jmilburn@hancockcoingov.org
26/03
We live in the Global Location Age. “Where am I?” is being replaced by, “Where am I in relation to everything else?”
Penn State Public Broadcasting is developing the Geospatial Revolution Project, an integrated public service media and outreach initiative on the brave new world of digital mapping.
The project will include a 60-minute public television broadcast program, a structured outreach initiative with educational partners, a chaptered program DVD including educational toolkit components, and a website with information and additional resources.
See the trailer for the program at http://geospatialrevolution.psu.edu.
Penn State Public Broadcasting is developing the Geospatial Revolution Project, an integrated public service media and outreach initiative on the brave new world of digital mapping.
The project will include a 60-minute public television broadcast program, a structured outreach initiative with educational partners, a chaptered program DVD including educational toolkit components, and a website with information and additional resources.
See the trailer for the program at http://geospatialrevolution.psu.edu.