Skip Maine state header navigation
Skip First Level Navigation | Skip All Navigation
![]() |
| Home | Contact Us | Maine GIS | GeoLibrary | Site Map | |
| Home > Committees > Technical Committee > December 18, 2003 December 18, 2003GIS Technical Committee Meeting Attendees
The need for a multi-agency editing environment in SDE was forwarded at a previous meeting, and Maine Office of GIS has held several in-house work group discussions to draft a method to test such an effort. The results of those discussions, a draft Standard Operating Procedure Agreement and a draft Appendix A, for the description and identification of operators and their responsibilities, were circulated for discussion and review. The primary goal for establishing a Standard Operating Procedure, is to insure the maintenance and currentness of spatial features and attributes in multipurpose GIS databases. Such GIS databases were produced by collaborative funding of multiple agencies and are made available to all agencies, and the public, through MEGIS. In the case of GIS databases developed by a single agency, and shared with other agencies through publication at MEGIS, the goal of the SOP is to confirm the process and appropriate contacts for maintenance and currentness with the agency. Three points have focused the SOP discussion: USGS/MaineGIS 1:24000 National Hydrography Data project preconflation data layers HYD24POL, HYD24STR, and HYD24NET have recently become available; a collaborative hydrography update with MDIFW/MEDOC on CIREG numbers is ready for incorporation now; MEDEP/MDIFW MIDAS edits will be ready for incorporation into the centralized copy of hydrography data soon; and Maine GIS users are ready to capitalize on these new layers and updates. Front and center in the SOP draft is the recognition that the development of GIS databases frequently requires a cooperative multi-agency effort. Such databases have multiple stakeholders. Identification of stakeholders, process definition, and clear update procedures are essential to maintenance and currentness. With the go-ahead of the GIS EC, the original HYDRO subcommittee augmented by staff working on CIREG and MIDAS updates, will meet to discuss the drafts of the SOP, Appendices A and B. MEGIS will prepare a draft Appendix B of update procedures and call the meeting.
The GIS Tech Group has identified a need to discuss points of collaboration on ArcIMS application development. A number of ArcIMS applications are already published: MEDWP Public Water Supplies, MEDMR Whalesightings, MEGIS BaseMap and OrthoViewer, MESPO Wetlands Characterization. Development of a highly functional ArcIMS includes investment in user needs analysis, infrastructure, software, training, programming, GIS data, and cartography. Cost effective strategies include sharing in many of these areas, and collaborating on multipurpose and interactive projects. To date, MEGIS has shared cartographic layers developed for it’s ArcIMS to assist with MEDOC ArcIMS development. The MEDMR ArcIMS application required the development of several cartographic layers for the Gulf of Maine. MEGIS will schedule a January meeting. Attendees will each bring a list of current ArcIMS projects and cartographic layers. The meeting will focus on development of a user needs analysis and opportunities for collaboration.
A conference call was established with Collin Homer with the USGS National Land Cover Database Program and Steve Raber of NOAA’s Coastal Service Center to discuss possible collaboration in the development of a land cover database for Maine. Mike Smith, Chair of the GIS EC Remote Sensing Subcommittee, began with an overview of the subcommittee’s work and recommendations for land cover ( http://megis.maine.gov/standards/standards.asp ). Collin and Steve followed with a summary of their agency’s efforts to coordinate the development of a consistent national land cover database focused on 21 basic classes of land cover at 30 meter resolution to support regional analysis. The state’s goal are for a more detailed classification system and 10 meter spatial resolution that could be used at the watershed level. A group discussion followed about possibilities to join forces to meet the objectives of both state and federal government at the lowest possible cost. Discussions will continue in January after the state subcommittee has met with other stakeholders and has held a strategy session.
|
| Copyright © 2004 All rights reserved. |