Readit News logoReadit News
Posted by u/irasigman 25 days ago
Show HN: Mines.fyi – all the mines in the US in a leaflet visualizationmines.fyi/...
I downloaded the MSHA's (Mine Safety and Health Administration) public datasets and create a visualization of all the mines in the US complete with the operators and details on each site.
koshergweilo · 25 days ago
I don't know why, but when I read the title I assumed the map was about landmines.

No, these are the cool ones that take stuff out of the ground, not the ones that destroy everything above them

jedberg · 25 days ago
Same! And then I saw three near my house and thought "if they know where they are, why haven't they been removed???"

Then I clicked on one and saw it was the name of our local rock quarry. :)

rpozarickij · 24 days ago
I'm pretty sure for me "mining.fyi" wouldn't have created any associations with landmines (although "mines.fyi" does seem to match the contents of the website closer).

It'd be really interesting to see A/B testing results about what most people associate the word "mines" with (I wouldn't be surprised if that would be landmines in this day and age).

hogwasher · 23 days ago
Even "mine.fyi" would be better at not making me think "landmine", although that would instead get read as "belonging to me".fyi.

I assume this is probably because most people don't see mines (as in gold mines) mentioned in plural very often. Or if someone does refer to multiple mines at once, they usually also specify the type of mine at the same time, like, "the cadmium mines in [country]" or similar. Or if talking about old, abandoned mines in an area, they're usually referred to as such.

The word "mines" on its own without an adjective usually does mean landmines, I think.

(I also immediately assumed this was about landmines.)

guessmyname · 25 days ago
Oh! I thought it was landmines too and was very confused + concerned when I saw dots near where I live.
andrew_mason1 · 24 days ago
hey now, landmines destroy stuff below them too
buildbot · 25 days ago
I had exactly the same thought, and was quite intrigued. Very disappointed actually, it would be cool if there was open data about land mines.
AlotOfReading · 25 days ago
The US government has been pretty good about cleaning up the UXO it knows about, which means what's left is the UXO it doesn't know about. You'll find it near most of the current and former testing ranges, particularly Yuma Proving Ground where there's trails leading right from the adjacent BLM land into areas with potential UXO. The only real barriers are a few signs and the law.
pimlottc · 25 days ago
Please reduce the aggregation of map markers. It's not helpful to group every mine in southwest US in a single point in California that makes it look like they are none in any other state. I see this all the time on maps and it's really frustrating. Aggregate markers are helpful when the individual points are actually overlapping on the map, otherwise they obscure location data.
nick49488171 · 25 days ago
Agreed. Huge annoyance when looking for routes on MountainProject as one example.
phillipseamore · 25 days ago
True. Clustering on a map is usually a sign that a map was setup by someone that doesn't use it or has no interest in the data.

Dead Comment

charv · 25 days ago
Strong disagree — aggregate markers were super useful when browsing the map on mobile! Maybe need to add a flag for mobile vs. desktop, but the experience would be a lot worse on mobile without them.
pimlottc · 24 days ago
I tried it on mobile. The clustering reduces it to 6 points for all of North America. My phone has over 3 million pixels, surely there’s room for more detail than that.
Firehawke · 25 days ago
Strong disagree. Zoom in and the clusters break up. Without the clustering, the map is a total mess when zoomed out.
pimlottc · 24 days ago
There’s a place for clustering but it doesn’t need to be so aggressive
tastyfreeze · 25 days ago
USGS MRDATA has a lot more mines. Their data is also freely available for download. I use their datasets and base maps for my personal GIS projects.

https://mrdata.usgs.gov/

bombcar · 25 days ago
It includes what most would call quarries and it doesn't include anywhere near all of them (there are basically infinite invisible quarries everywhere to make concrete because it doesn't transport well).
HardwareLust · 25 days ago
I saw your title and my first thought was "Why are there landmines in the US?" lol.
buildbot · 25 days ago
Apparently there are in fact, 0. Publicly, at least.
alan_sass · 25 days ago
Just a heads-up that this is nowhere near "all the mines" in Nevada. I've explored quite a few personally, live by some, and that entire list of my memories is missing. NV is also not included in the list of top 10 states which is a clear indicator of missing data fwiw.
SaberTail · 25 days ago
This doesn't seem to be complete. It's missing the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, for example, which should be southeast of Carlsbad, NM. It's a underground salt (metal/non-metal) mine, and MSHA definitely regulates it
greggsy · 25 days ago
The state numbers don’t seem to marry up, unless they’re indicative of something else?
snypher · 25 days ago
WIPP isn't really a mine, right? More like an Amazon warehouse.
SaberTail · 24 days ago
as far as MSHA is concerned it is. They take salt out of the ground to make room for the waste.
kenforthewin · 25 days ago
I'm glad it's those kinds of mines rather than the ones I first thought of.
irasigman · 25 days ago
Downloaded from https://www.msha.gov/data-and-reports/mine-data-retrieval-sy.... Pipe-delimited, updated weekly by MSHA.
alexchamberlain · 25 days ago
There are 3 mines on Manhattan; is that correct?
leeter · 25 days ago
Based on the info if you click into them, likely no. I would have expected them to be incidental materials from tunneling, but reading the description that's not the case.
greggsy · 25 days ago
Quarries?