Montana – Canada – North Dakota Boundary Issues

May 20, 2015

Scope• State Boundary deviations (from

what aerial photos would indicate to be correct based on agricultural use) span almost 100 miles on the Canadian border (Sheridan and Daniels Counties) and 165 miles on the Montana/N. Dakota border (from Sheridan to northern Fallon County). The hypotenuse is approximately 193 miles and the area within the triangle is about 8250 square miles or the approximate equivalent of 229 townships.

• These border issues need to be fixed. This is becoming a next generation 9-1-1 issue for both states. Additionally, commercial providers like OnStar need accurate PSAP boundaries (which are normally based on county boundaries) as they are routing 9-1-1 calls to PSAPS

• This is impacting 5 Montana counties, 4 N. Dakota counties, and countless other vertically integrated administrative districts (school, fire, etc.)

Approximately 100 miles

Approximately 165 m

iles

Northern BoundaryThis is the first place I can discern the beginning of a deviation – Section 5, 37N, 43 E – about 1 mile east of the Daniels/Valley County border

This is the NE corner of the state. It appears that the boundary needs to move approximately 100 ft. to the North and the actual corner is over 200 ft. from where it should be (based on photography. We will have more precise measurements from our survey control

Eastern Boundary BoundaryOn the south end this is the first place I can begin to discern a deviation – between section 28 and 33, T10N, R61E – Beaver Slide Road in Fallon County very near the Wibaux/ Fallon border

What does the interior look like?In the next four slides we will move in a southeast diagonal direction from Daniels to Wibaux County and examine the apparent CadNSDI shifts as indicated from aerial photography. As you will see the CadNSDI accuracy appears to varies considerably from township to township

T35N, 45E – NE corner of section 28 in Daniels County. Appears that it could be adjusted about 35 feet to the northeast. We would not normally consider this a priority area for adjustment

What does the interior look like?T30N, 52E – NE corner of section 22 in Roosevelt County. Appears that it could be adjusted about 30 feet to the north – easting looks right on. We would not normally consider this a priority area for adjustment but it would improve the looks

What does the interior look like?T30N, 52E – NE corner of section 22 in Roosevelt County. Appears that it could be adjusted about 30 feet to the north – easting looks right on. We would not normally consider this a priority area for adjustment but it would improve the looks

What does the interior look like?T24N, 54E – SE corner of section 8 in Richland County. Appears that it could be adjusted about 75 feet to southeast. This is inconsistent with the north or northeast shift we see in Daniels and Roosevelt and the following example from Wibaux County

What does the interior look like?T12N, 60E – NE corner of section 25 in Wibaux County. Appears that it could be adjusted about 140 feet to the northeast with most of the movement to the east. We are two townships from the border here and this would be consistent with the state border moving to the east

Adjustment Options

1. Just move the boundary based primarily on photo control but using the survey control collected by BLM in the NE corner area and taking into consideration the IBC monument data on the northern boundary.

• Pros – relatively easy and quick with no parcel fabric adjustments required – would meet the N. Dakota 9-1-1 needs

• Cons – All the error is thrown into the border townships. Townships along the border will appear to contain more acreage and still won’t match the photography except at the border. We haven’t fixed any of the CadNSDI shift issues.

Adjustment Options

2. Adjust the entire area using parcel fabric adjustment tools and collecting a massive amount of photo interpreted points to allow for the different directional shifts contained within the entire area•Pros – improves the PLSS accuracy of a very large area of the state•Cons – Very time consuming. Would likely take months. Will likely not meet N. Dakota 9-1-1 needs

Adjustment Options

3. Adjust the entire area using parcel fabric adjustment tools but collecting a limited amount of photo control possibly limited to only township corners•Pros – Quicker than option 2. May improve the PLSS accuracy of portions of the area. •Cons – Still time consuming. Would likely take at least a month, probably more. Will almost certainly degrade CadNSDI accuracy in areas.

Adjustment Options

4. Other ideas????????? •Pros – •Cons –