Overview and
Reference
for the
Interagency Trail Data Standards Version 1
Why Interagency
Trail Data Standards?
Trails of all kinds, including Congressionally and Secretarially designated trails, are receiving greater recognition than ever by the public and governmental agencies as important recreational and cultural resources. The National Park Service (NPS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the United States Forest Service (USFS) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service have worked for many years with each other and with States, local governments and trail organizations to promote and develop trails for the benefit of the public.
Heretofore, there have not been universal standards for trail terminology and data attributes. However, inter-jurisdictional projects, promotion, and management all suggest the need for universal data standards. These will enable national, regional, State and trail-level managers and the public to use mutually understood terminology for recording, retrieving and applying spatial and tabular information. Data standards will make it easier for various computer systems to “talk” to one another, so that information can be accessed, exchanged and used by more than one individual, agency or group. Ease in sharing data increases the capability for enhanced and consistent mapping, inventory, monitoring, condition assessment, maintenance, costing, budgeting, information retrieval, and summary reporting for a variety of internal and external needs.
In May of 2001, the Federal Interagency Council on Trails,
based on a provision in the January, 2001, Memorandum of Understanding for the
Administration and Management of National Historic and National Scenic Trails,
assembled an interagency team of trail, data, and subject-matter specialists to
develop national-level interagency trail data standards. This action stemmed from a collective need to
inventory, assess and map trail locations and trail resources across multiple
jurisdictions throughout the
Key Points
· The trail data standards are primarily an attempt at finding agreement on terminology.
· Existing databases will not have to change.
· The interagency trail data standards are not a database.
· The ITDS Version 1 is one step in the Federal Government's ongoing process of data standards definition and adoption. The team is currently working with the Geographic Information Systems (GIS) community to refine the geospatial components of the standards, within the individual agencies on implementation steps, and with the steering team for Recreation One-Stop to incorporate the standards into that E-government initiative.
A Note about Recreation
One-Stop
Current Federal Government practice requires agencies to provide information in electronic format to the public. Recreation One-Stop, an interagency project of the President’s Management Agenda for electronic government (“E-gov”), is striving to meet the need for recreation information in electronic format. Trails are one component of the federal government’s recreation line of business. A goal of the Recreation One-Stop initiative is to provide “one-stop shopping” for federal recreation information. RecML, a component of Recreation One-Stop, will be the collected Extensible Mark-up Language (XML) data standards that define terms for recreation facilities (trails, campgrounds, etc.), activities (hiking, wildlife viewing, etc.), and transactions (reservations, fees, etc.). The Federal Interagency Council on Trails has been invited by the Recreation One-Stop project to provide the RecML data standards for trails and will be submitting the Interagency Trail Data Standards Version 1 for adoption.
Legal Underpinnings of the Interagency Trail Data Standards Project
The following mandates and directives recognize the need for the development of data standards.
· The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (P. L. 104-13)
· The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) (P. L. 103-62)
· The President’s E-Government initiative (Recreation One-Stop)
· The Interagency Memorandum Of Understanding for the Administration and Management of National Historic and Scenic Trails
· Executive Order 13195
· "GIS for the National Trails System - An Action Plan", 2001, as requested by Congress
Underlying Premises for Development
of Trail Data Standards
Listed below
are a few of the basic premises that the ITDS team identified and agreed to
during the development of the ITDS Version 1.
Factors Considered:
·
Interagency Core Data Set:
Represents the minimum set of data that the agencies agree to provide
for all agency-managed or administered trails (i.e. System Trails and/or
Designated Trails).
·
Data Collection and Management: Data is not cheap! Each piece of data that is collected and
recorded represents a cost in terms of time, database capability and available
space. The subsequent and ongoing need
to update certain data attributes represents an additional expense. The decision to collect, record and manage
specific data should always be done considering the benefits and value of the
data versus the initial and future cost.
·
Standardized Terminology:
Strive to establish and/or use the same terminology among agencies for
interagency trail data standards. When
this is not possible, provide crosswalk translation between the interagency
data attribute terminology and definitions and that of the individual agency.
·
Existing Data Attributes:
If an identified Interagency Core Data Attribute already exists as a
standard attribute within one agency, but is not yet standardized and/or used
by other agencies, consider adopting the attribute terminology and/or
definition that is already in use to maximize efficiencies and minimize
confusion or data re-work.
·
Field Verification: To the extent possible, and when applicable,
trail data should be based on field verification/inventory. Formal trail inventory and condition
assessments should be done, if they do not already exist. [Interagency team
recommendation]
·
Implementation:
The core standards will be implemented and data provided based on
current agency priorities and budgets.
Timeline
· May of 2003: Draft interagency trail data standards reviewed internally by National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management and US Forest Service staff
·
May 1 –
· October, 2004: US Fish and Wildlife Service joins the team
· Fall of 2005: Submit ITDS Version 1 to Recreation One-Stop
· Fiscal Year 2005: Refine geospatial components of ITDS Version 1
Interagency Definition of a Trail
Trail: A linear route managed for human-powered,
stock, or OHV forms of transportation or for historic or heritage values.
Trails provide public access for opportunities of
outdoor recreation as well as access to many significant prehistoric and
historic sites.
Some portions of historic trails are accessible today,
and provide recreational and other benefits, while others, more 'virtual' in
nature, provide a cultural and/or historic experience, but are not physically
capable of being traversed or accessed.
Historic trails can consist of a path, a route, a corridor, a road, a
river/stream, etc. (See "NHT Corridor Concept"
below.)
(Refer to individual agency trail
definitions for further agency-specific guidance or direction on defining a
trail.)
The
interagency definition is based on and encompasses individual agency definitions
of a trail, and includes “standard” trails, National Scenic Trails and National
Historic Trails. The definition was
adopted by the interagency trail data standards team in July 2002.
Understanding the National Historic
Trails (NHT) Corridor Concept
National
Historic Trails (NHTs) differ from "regular" trails, which can
generally be described, inventoried and managed as one linear route. This is
not usually the case with NHTs. To
better understand the inventory and management of NHTs, it is helpful to
consider each NHT as an unofficial, informal "corridor", rather than
a single line on a map. Each “NHT
corridor” is comprised of two and often three aspects:
"
"NHT2 Heritage
Resources": What and where is the route and sites where
history actually occurred? [NHT2
occurs on all NHTs, although physical evidence and/or remnants may no longer be
present. Location may be other than the
congressionally designated route.]
"NHT3 Recreation and/or Interpretive Trail/Road/Sites": Where/what is the route and associated sites that people can use (i.e. trail/road/site used for recreation or interpretation)? [May or may not be present. NHT2 location may vary from the congressionally designated route and/or original, historically used route.]
To be effective, NHT administrators and managers rely on data representing two to three of these various components that can occur within an NHT corridor. It is important to note that “corridor” is used here as an unofficial descriptive concept, and not intended to imply the existence of actual area boundaries.
The
Interagency NHT Data Standards Team recommends this concept be adopted and used
internally to better communicate and explain the management and data needs
related to NHTs.
Selection Criteria for Interagency
Core Questions & Data Attributes
To focus on
the most common trail data needs, eight criteria were used to choose the core
set of questions and data attributes that are in the draft interagency trail
data standards.
Does the Question or Data Attribute….
1 Apply to all affected agencies?
2 Directly relate to a Core Interagency Question (data
output)?
3 Have national, regional or state-wide significance?
4 Contribute to the minimum data needed to provide a
programmatic (heritage, maintenance, natural resources) snapshot of the trail
(i.e. inventory, public information)?
5 Include the minimum data needed to comply with and
reflect applicable laws, regulations, and/or policies?
6 Addresses key congressional, OMB, and department-wide
reporting requirements?
7 (Is the Data Attribute…) Currently available or obtainable?
8 Include those attributes that would set national
precedence or affect nation-wide trail management?
Interagency
Core Trail Questions
|
Interagency Core Trail Questions |
Core Question Applies
To These Trails* |
||||||
|
Reg. Trail |
NST |
NHT1 |
NHT2 |
NHT3 |
|||
|
Metadata (Common to all Data Attributes) |
|||||||
|
|
Metadata |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
Trail Identification (Required for All Trail Records) |
|||||||
|
|
(Common attributes basic to all Core Questions) |
X |
X |
X |
X** |
X |
|
|
Basic Trail Information |
|||||||
|
1 |
Where is
the trail? |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
2 |
What is
the total trail length? (in miles) |
X |
X |
X |
X** |
X |
|
|
3 |
Who manages the trail? |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
4 |
What is the trail status? |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
5 |
What is the trail surface? |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
Trail Management & Use |
|||||||
|
6 |
What agency-specific management direction exists for the trail? |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
7 |
What national designations exist for the trail? |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
8 |
Does the trail pass through a special management area and which
one? |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
9 |
What are the actively managed uses of the trail? |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
10 |
What is the Accessibility status of the trail? ( |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
11 |
What is the condition or state of repair of the trail? |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
12 |
How much does it cost to manage the trail? |
X |
X |
|
|
X |
|
|
Additional Questions Specific Only to NSTs or NHTs |
|||||||
|
Additional NST and/or
NHT Basic Information |
|||||||
|
13 |
Who administers the NST or NHT? |
|
X |
X |
|
X |
|
|
14 |
What Visitor Centers are specifically associated with the NHT or
NST? |
|
X |
X |
|
X |
|
|
15 |
What
visitor facilities exist along the NST or NHT? |
|
X |
X |
|
X |
|
|
NHT Heritage Resource
Information |
|||||||
|
16 |
Where is
the |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
|
17 |
What known heritage resources are thematically associated with
the NHT? |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
18 |
What High Potential Sites are on the NHT? |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
19 |
What High Potential Segments are on the NHT? |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
20 |
What portions of the NHT have been Certified? |
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
21 |
What heritage resources are developed and/or used for public
viewing/appreciation? |
|
|
X |
X |
X |
|
|
22 |
What is
the physical condition rating of the portion(s) of the NHT route where
historic use actually took place? |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
Core Questions Considered but Deferred |
|||||||
|
23 |
NHT1 & NHT2 Question: How much does it cost to manage the NHT?
(administration, planning, construction, maintenance) |
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
The type of trail (or aspect of an NHT) that the Core Question
applies to: |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regular Trail: Any
agency-managed trail that is not a designated NST or NHT |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NST: National Scenic
Trail (Congressionally Designated) |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NHT1 (Desig): Route/s
Congressionally designated as the National Historic Trail |
|
||||
|
|
|
NHT2 (HR):
NHT-associated heritage resources (routes and/or sites) |
|
||||
|
|
|
NHT3 (Rec):
NHT-associated recreation or interpretive route and/or site |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
** |
Applicable to associated NHT heritage resource or NHT
recreation/interpretive route (trail or road). |
||||||