Feature Request - Ingest polygons from Marine Regions as Fun and Flexible Features

[Jegelewicz]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
A clear and concise description of what the problem is. Ex. I'm always frustrated when [...]

Find everything from "Atlantic Ocean"

Describe what you're trying to accomplish
A clear and concise overview of the goals; why are you asking for this?

Enhance search for marine geography without adding to higher geography authorities.

Describe the solution you'd like
How might we accomplish your goals?

Ingest polygons from Marine Regions as Fun and Flexible Features

Describe alternatives you've considered
A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.

There is no good alternative as right now the higher geography for the Atlantic is split between North Atlantic and South Atlantic

Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.

@ArctosDB/geo-group

Priority
Please assign a priority-label. Unprioritized issues gets sent into a black hole of despair.

[Jegelewicz]

I think that maybe we should make narrower requests since marine regions is an aggregation.

[dustymc]

Blocked by #6521 (and perhaps a general lack of performance, although I can't quite correlate that with data quantity).

narrower requests

I'll need a shapefile (or something else that my limited tools can handle) if I get past the immediate obstacles, that'll probably scope the request(s).

This would also be some unknown amount of disk (for data and indexes-n-such), take more backup, need more memory to avoid swap, etc. - it's a potentially significant long-term cost, that should be somehow addressed up front. (The cost seems well worth paying from here, the benefits would be pretty awesome - if this could be made performant, anyway - but I'm not signing the checks!)

[Jegelewicz]

The cost seems well worth paying from here, the benefits would be pretty awesome - if this could be made performant, anyway - but I'm not signing the checks!

It is the cost that makes me think we should not import marine regions wholesale, but only things the member institutions actually need.

[mkoo]

Working on the FFF= POLYGONS for this.

Will definitely be part of BerkeleyMapper's intersection tool, too

[dustymc]

cost that makes me think we should not import marine regions wholesale,

Well one way to pay that might be to loop marinregions into #5597 (eg some big collaborative grant) - maybe they'd like to not have to worry about infrastructure, and I'm pretty sure TACC has a few billion GPU cycles laying around getting bored....

https://www.marineregions.org/about.php (maybe they're already drowning in €s....)

That'd also mean BM wouldn't need to do all the stuff Arctos has already done.

[genevieve-anderegg]

It is the cost that makes me think we should not import marine regions wholesale, but only things the member institutions actually need.

Here are a few to start with that are quite relevant to DMNS:Inv data:

https://www.marineregions.org/gazetteer.php?p=details&id=7579 - Great Barrier Reef (n=377)

https://www.marineregions.org/gazetteer.php?p=details&id=7587 - Peru-Chile Trench (used in https://arctos.database.museum/guid/DMNS:Inv:26912

https://www.marineregions.org/gazetteer.php?p=details&id=8453 - United States Exclusive Economic Zone (Hawaii) (several hundred)