This is the source dataset’s website:
No source website. Ducks Unlimited employees created and updated it. ‘https://www.ducks.org/’
The data download is available here: No public data download.
License
I have checked that this data is compatible with the ODbL.
This is my first time really working with licenses and I’m not sure what it falls under. We created the data using all sorts of imagery available on Google Earth. I’m not sure if that carries a license to it. We would like to make it open.
TLDR information: These are man made linear mounds of soil pulled from the marsh directly next to the mound. They are typically planted with native marsh vegetation. The purpose is to establish plants and geological features within open water that was once marsh to reduce subsidence and build habitat.
Your relationship to the dataset, if any: We created it and want to make it public.
What the dataset contains: Linear center line features representing the mounds.
The size of the dataset: <1MB
The method you are using to import into OSM: We’ll be using JOSM and importing a single terrace field at a time. Any additional fields will be manually entered.
How you plan to translate the dataset tags to OSM schema: It was my understanding that JOSM takes care of that.
Your approach to conflation: Shoreline along the Gulf Coast is always changing because of marsh subsidence, accretion, and changes in water level. There may be some shoreline features within the terrace fields. These will most likely be manually removed if they are not accurate anymore.
You need to prove your compatibility by listing out the exact imagery layers used. Google and similar others are assumed to be prohibited without permission.
I didn’t understand what’s your “terrace” at first, even after seeing the natural=terrace you used. Thought it’s about terraced fields hillside for farming rice on slopes. There are other different “terrace”.
It seems similar enough to a man_made=breakwater , but unfortunately there’s no standard to specify it. As there are a dozen =oyster_castle , it could be breakwater=marsh_terrace first. breakwater=oyster_castle | Tags | OpenStreetMap Taginfo (be aware =berm can’t be used, as that’s an actual design) year_of_construction= is outdated. It’s only ever useful for human-use structures when there’s a gap between construction and opening, for which there’s still construction_date= by far. start_date= should be used by default.
In the end, if this doesn’t work out, you could still consider using a OSM data based basemap as the background layer of a custom map to visualize your dataset to the public. The dataset can be made available from other open data portals instead.
From OSM’s perspective, it depends on the licenses of any imagery you used in Google Earth. Some providers only license imagery to Google Earth on certain conditions, which may or may not restrict tracing activity (not sure). For example, if you only used Google Earth to view public domain imagery from the U.S. federal government, which you traced off of, then Google probably has no rights of their own associated with your data. But if you traced from a commercial satellite layer, or imagery that Google themselves own, there may be more terms and conditions that preclude an import into OSM.
Otherwise, as long as you created the data in the first place, you have the right to make it available to OSM under a compatible license, preferably public domain with a CC0 dedication, but ODbL is also a common choice.
man_made=marsh_terrace or natural=marsh_terrace should be more appropriate. They are not permanent natural structures. From what I’ve seen they either erode away or do their job and start to become islands of vegetation.
I’ll change the outdated year_of_construction to the recommended start_date=year.
I was informed that the Office of Coastal Management’s PermitTrak system has publicly available planning documents for the terrace projects. I’ll look there first before getting into imagery. Someone else in the organization initially created the dataset 7 years ago and I don’t believe imagery source was recorded.
By the way, if you are able to determine that the data is in the public domain and can provide start_date=* tags, then this data is also a good candidate for inclusion in OpenHistoricalMap at the same time as OSM. I realize OHM probably isn’t on your radar, but I figured I’d point that out in case you want to do any visualization around trends in terrace construction. In OSM, start_date=* is an afterthought, mainly for things like commemorative plaques that have dates printed on them, but it’s a much more fundamental tag in OHM, powering the animated time slider and other things.
We went through all the terraces and noted the imagery used:
Maxar Technologies
Airbus
Texas GLO
NAIP
Landsat/Copernicus
I have emails out to Airbus and Maxar about derived products. Terraces delineated from Texas GLO, NAIP, and Landsat imagery, as far as I know, are fine to be shared publicly. I checked with Texas GLO and they verified it’s open data.
I believe I’ll go with tags:
man_made= marsh_terrace
imagery_used= whatever we recorded from Google Earth Pro
start_date= year the entire field was complete.
I make a note about the entire field being complete because sometimes it’s a multi-year process. A field started in 8/2005 may not be fully completely until 8/2008. Sometimes portions of fields are created over time but I’m trying to separate these. One part finished in 2010 but and a completely separate part within the same marsh was started in 2018.
I haven’t heard back from Airbus or Maxar so we went back and any terraces digitized with those we re-digitized using pan sharpened Landsat or Sentinel 2. All digitized terraces are now created from open imagery.