Proposed Features/Tag:boundary=aboriginal lands

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Status: Proposed (under way)
Proposed by: Acrosscanadatrails
Tagging: boundary=aboriginal_lands
Applies to: boundary
Definition: Tagging the boundary of aboriginal lands.
Rendered as: heavy dashed line
Drafted on: 2010-03-11
RFC start: 2008-06-25
Vote start: *
Vote end: *
Entering Hualapai Indian Reservation.jpg

Tagging structure

Use boundary=aboriginal_lands to mark the jurisdiction area. Area The preferred usage is to only apply this tag to areas over Node as it is more detailed for the map.

The boundary=administrative does not work since some aboriginal lands are equivalent in jurisdiction to province and others to country. So therefore, an aboriginal lands admin_level=* is not equivalent to a numerical value.

Also, the border_type=native_reserve or territorial is not needed, because the the tag for boundaries boundary=* already marks the borders of areas, mostly political, but also of other administrative areas.

Add the tag place=region only if

population=number of people living in the reserve is known.
size=area in square km is known, and a census was gathered from the source.

Also add source=to identify where you got the information from.

Add wikipedia=* to list the wiki article about the people living on the reserve.

Add description=description of the reserve to help further identify it.

Add url=[web site of the reserve web site of the reserve] if it is available

Add image=an http://.... .jpg link to a picture to show what the reserve looks like


Another option is to use "first_nation" or "indian_reserve". In the GeoBase dataset, it's called "GeoBase Aboriginal Lands"

Wikipedia:Aboriginal peoples in Canada comprise the First Nations,[2] Inuit[3] and Métis.[4] The descriptors "Indian" and "Eskimo" are falling into disuse.[5] Old Crow Flats and Bluefish Caves are the earliest archaeological sites of human habitation in Canada.[6] The Paleo-Indian Clovis, Plano cultures and Pre-Dorset pre-date American indigenous and Inuit cultures. Projectile point tools, spears, pottery, bangles, chisels and scrapers mark archaeological sites, thus distinguishing cultural periods, traditions and lithic reduction styles.

Sample Area

This is the sample area showing the T'Souke 1 - reserve. See both sides of the hwy14

Currently, admin_level=3 is shown north of hwy14 is shown north of hwy 14. (as a sample to show how it could be rendered)

South of highway 14 is the other part of T'Souke 1 with the tags boundary=aboriginal_lands; name=T'Souke 1; source=geobase




In Canada some areas of land are designated as Indian Reserves, held in trust for First Nation bands. Some of these lands cross provincial borders and even cross the U.S. border (see Akwesasne )

Suggestion: First Nations and Indian Reservations should be boundary=administrative; admin_level=1; border_type=first_nation; as they are international.

Should borders like this really be administrative? Certainly using admin_level=1 for this just looks wrong to me... --Eimai 17:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Eimai. If they are international borders, they should be treated as admin_level=2 just like other international borders. --Hawke 05:48, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest that we remove these from admin_level=1, and use something else instead. We now have a boundary=national_park, which arguably has some administrative function. In the same way as the various equivalents of "National Parks" in other countries, these cross various administrative boundaries, and should probably be considered as being orthogonal to county and state-level borders. For example, the Brecon Beacons National Park includes land in no fewer than nine counties. boundary=indian_reserve perhaps? Chriscf 11:57, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

It can also apply to other native people, such as the Masaai in Kenya/Tanzania or the Samii in Norway/Sweeden/Finland/Russia. boundary=native_reserve or boundary=native_nation is probably better. But I fully support removing them from boundary=administrative. Let admin_level=1 be reserved for supernational administrative borders such as the European union. --Skippern 13:15, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Eimai ... Skippern. In spite of the great respect I can have for those Nations and Peoples... There are other solution, like the Skippern's one. FrViPofm
All, ok how's this boundary=native_reserve; border_type=territorial; place=region; name=*; admin_level=2 Maybe this should cover all grounds.--acrosscanadatrails 12:37, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
boundary=native_reserve; border_type=territorial; place=region/county/city whatever that fits; name=*; description=description of the reserve; www=web site of the reserve, if any; wikipedia=wiki article about the people living on the reserve; population=number of people living in the reserve; and do not forget source=*. I think admin_level is not suitable for such reserves. --Skippern 13:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

With some time to think about it, this tag proposal page should be changed to boundary:type=aboriginal_lands. Here's why:

admin_level=4 -- because it has its own jurisdiction which is similar to a 'state/province' level, where it is still within a country (generally) more times than not. There are special cases (just like countries that are in transition & dispute). In some countries there are signed agreements with members of each group.
place=state -- this should also be used, as it clearly defines the fact that it is like a State/Province jurisdiction and more clearly defines the admin_level, where admin_level=4 could be used for boundary=national_park
boundary=administrative -- because this is an 'administrative' boundary. Where it's known, and sometimes signed, as it would be trespassing if there is no implied visiting (there is no security check to go/through the area)
boundary:type=aboriginal_lands -- although this is not documented (yet), it is a way to clearly list what type of boundary this is
landuse=reserve -- in OSM, both the landuse and drawing the actual property line is used interchangeably. In this case. the default landuse would be the fact that the whole are is a reserve. When more details are known, these can also be mapped; Listing the physical environment, such as 'natural=wood' natural=grass natural=water.

--acrosscanadatrails 16:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I disagree, This would imply that, for instance, Cowichan 1 is not part of British Columbia and is a province in its own right. It doesn't even have its own government but is rather just one of 9 reserves in the Cowichan Tribes, and Cowichan Tribes as a whole is more comparable to a municipality in its scope than a province. I would give Cowichan tribes as a whole an admin level of 7 or 8, and Cowichan 1 no higher than 9. Landuse seems inappropriate as being part of a reserve doesn't imply any particular use of the land and many specific land uses can occur; Cowichan 1 has residential, commercial, farmland, industrial, forestry, and unused land. And what exactly would place=boundary:type be as distinct from straight boundary=*? --Hai-Etlik 01:47, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

See also