A note about data scale:
Scale is an important factor in data usage. Certain scale datasets are not suitable for some project, analysis, or modelling purposes. Please be sure you are using the best available data.
1:24000 scale datasets are recommended for projects that are at the county level. 1:24000 data should NOT be used for high accuracy base mapping such as property parcel boundaries.
1:100000 scale datasets are recommended for projects that are at the multi-county or regional level. 1:125000 scale datasets are recommended for projects that are at the regional or state level or larger.
Vector datasets with no defined scale or accuracy should be considered suspect. Make sure you are familiar with your data before using it for projects or analysis. Every effort has been made to supply the user with data documentation. For additional information, see the References section and the Data Source Contact section of this documentation. For more information regarding scale and accuracy, see our webpage at: <http://geoplan.ufl.edu/education.html>
Aquatic Preserve boundaries were created by the Florida Marine Research Institute (FMRI)/CAMRA. We are using these boundaries to represent the OFWs that are also designated Aquatic Preserves
Special OFW Category :
The streams and lakes that do not have defined legal boundaries were automated using methods other than transferring legal descriptions into a digital format. Because of the interpretive nature of the boundaries for the Special Waters Category, we have avoided making any implication that this line represents the ordinary high water line that separates the State-owned lands from privately-owned lands by referring to this line as a fuzzy boundary or trip wire. Final determinations of these boundaries will require on-site inspections or aerial photo-interpretations coupled with field verifications and will not be carried out for any of the streams and lakes designated as OFWs, in the short term. These interpretive boundaries were designed to alert persons making land use decisions that on-site inspections or further investigations by qualified soils scientists or botanists may be necessary. These interpretive boundaries are necessary because if a proposed activity falls within or near an OFW boundary, different, more stringent permitting review standards are imposed on the permittee's application. The OFW Special Water boundary is based on the contour lines from the U.S. Geological Survey 1:24000-scale quadrangle maps. This boundary is labeled with the elevation of those contours that are most likely to meet the criteria of supporting obligate and facultative plants and hydric soils. These elevations are 5 or 10 feet apart vertically, so that other information was used to modify the line. Currently, the best additional information is a set of EOSAT satellite images from 1992. The 1994 EOSAT imagery was also available, but because 1994 was an extremely wet year, the spectral reflectance values were judged less reliable. However, other indications that the area inside the Special Waters delineation line is likely to meet the rule's criteria are the swamp symbols on the quadrangle, the change in slope that is indicative of the seepage line, or springs that indicate that the groundwater is near the surface at that elevation. Cultural features can also be helpful. Roads often stop at wetted areas and buildings are usually (but not always) built above the elevation of the water feature's most frequent floods. Similarly, railroads are usually built up high enough to stay dry. This information is generally discernible on USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles.
Other OFW Categories :
All other categories are taken from the Lands managed for Conservation created and compiled by GEOPLAN or have been created by us using descriptions from the Outstanding Florida Waters documentation. Those boundaries created internally were scanned from published materials, registered and rectified with 1:24,000 USGS Public Land Survey section corners. Data was then extracted from USGS 1:24,000 hydrology layer and attributed. For boundaries not completely represented by USGS 1:24,000 hydrology layer, arcs were digitized directly from the scanned material to complete the boundary. State Parks and Recreational Areas Category
The COGO method has several advantages and disadvantages for use in producing a database for the OFWs. It uses primary source material - the legal description on the deed. Data created using this method should have validity within the legal system because it is from a source familiar to the courts. Other agencies are using the COGO system so it is a familiar process and product. COGO methodology is appropriate in that it weds the new system for describing land ownership to the existing system. Additionally, each parcel boundary will be maintained in a digital form and can be extracted from the official boundary as a parcel's status changes. This data layer will also be maintained and updated by the stewards of all the state park boundaries data, so as the parcel boundaries change, the OFW boundaries will automatically be updated. The downside is that COGO (or the survey data it automates) is labor intensive and requires extensive training and expertise to use. Each legal description references source materials that may only be available locally or from the county appraiser's office, at a cost of travel and materials. Each park boundary may have numerous parcels transferred to the state at different times and some parcel boundaries overlap. Legal descriptions were transferred to digital form using the COGO modules in ESRI's ARC/INFO software on a UNIX platform DEC Alpha 3000 workstation and Softdesk's ADDCAD Civil/Survey software on 486/90 DELL personal computers configured with 1 gigabyte storage memory, 32 megabytes of RAM, 17" VGA monitors and running DOS. Both platforms are connected to HP-650C plotters. See Standard COGO Procedures developed by the Division of Parks and Recreation.