Inclusion and Exclusion of Data not in Tennessee
While reviewing, cleaning, and enhancing the data of Tennessee Landforms I found several points which while close to being inside of Tennessee, I opted to exclude from this dataset. My reasoning is that the points inside Kentucky fall within the purview of my friend's work at Kentucky Landforms. The North Carolina point falls within several datasets of North Carolina data. Removal from Tennessee Landforms doesn't mean removal from existence in other words. However, I present the data here, in the event that any other data sources are lost.
ID | Lat | Long | Name | Type | County | Reference | Notes |
CTF004 | 36.198700 | -81.969500 | Elk/Big Falls | Waterfall | NC | GNIS | Actually in NC, but close. |
KYR001 | 36.607579 | -84.853167 | Chimney Rock | Rock | KY | GNIS | |
KYR002 | 36.601458 | -84.006590 | Bottle Rock | Rock | KY | Todd Fife, Vic Fife | |
SCA075 | 36.608938 | -84.664788 | Nancys Tunnel | Arch | Scott | Tim Smith | Reported as Scott County,but point is inside Kentucky. |
While I was removing this data, I added some other data which is not technically inside of Tennessee. Both Unicoi Crest Pullout (MOO007) and No Name Gap Pullout (MOO008) I chose to include in the dataset. They are only barely inside North Carolina, and document a "landform" type which I am not certain has adequate documentation for that state, overlooks.
Good points. Thanks for this. I admit Tom sought me out to get the coordinates for Bottle Rock. I was happy to help, but it certainly is on the other side of the line. Because I knew of his NC waterfalls parent file I now and then would email him with additional waterfalls there. I quit doing that when he asked me if I wanted to keep up the NC waterfalls database. I got the point. There has to be a cut off somewhere.
ReplyDelete