Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:05 AM, Mattias Dalkvist 
wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Michael Patrick 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> My guess is the permits for future operations are online also. Such an
>> inventory is is a non-trivial task
>> ,
>> especially maintaining it.
>>
>> A better way to handle this would be a federated page that layers OSM and
>> the forestry web service(s).
>>
>>
> This is why I started to think about this, the data about forest harvest
> in Sweden is under a CCBY like licence, but I wanted to get a better
> understanding how to tag it before contacting them and see if we can import
> the data in to OSM.
>

The point about a federated map is that the data that OSM mappers don't
maintain won't be imported.

For maps that I produce (example:
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test3.html?la=42.1344=-74.1186=14),
I usually don't attempt to use land cover from OSM. I use land cover data
from the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD), while I have other data from
OSM and other sources. That makes it similar to elevation data - the layers
in the OSM map that show elevations don't have all the contours in OSM,
they get them from elsewhere.

For that reason, I generally map landcover only where (a) I have personal
knowledge that NLCD is wrong, or (b) I'm mapping in my own suburban
community and want higher-resolution landcover information than the 100m or
so that NLCD gives me. In most cases, for a hiker, NLCD is fine. I at least
have some information about where I might expect to get my feet wet, and
which way to go to avoid pushing through a spruce thicket. It tells me that
I might expect a nice, unobstructed view to the south where the trail
crosses County Road 3 near the center of
https://kbk.is-a-geek.net/catskills/test3.html?la=42.5879=-74.1075=15.
That stuff is really what I need to know.

If everything were imported, there would be a nightmare trying to maintain
the data. If a local mapper has repaired anything about the imported
landcover information and there is a subsequent change to the same polygon
in your national database, what do you do? (Damaging the local mapper's
hard-won data is NOT acceptable.)

Incidentally, those maps also shows why I think that some other data should
not be imported. The trails shown in magenta are from some government
databases. The data are reliable in that they show the presence of trails
and their destinations, but their spatial accuracy leaves a lot to be
desired. You can see how the alignment is quite poor indeed where a magenta
trail is overlaid with a black one from OSM. The same database is what put
a parking lot in the middle of the woods south of the Schoharie Headwaters
Unit. (The parking is actually on the turning circle at the end of Prediger
Road). I show the magenta trails primarily as a mappers' 'to do' list for
field mapping.

So let me leave you with a challenging question: how would importing the
data benefit the OSM community more than federating it? What would
importing allow us to do that a federated approach would not? (For my
imports of public land boundaries in New York, my answer was, "it allows us
to conflate boundaries between land owned by different agencies, where the
complete set of parcels is not in any one agency's database." Moreover,
administrative boundaries often are an exception to the general rule that
federation is better than import.)
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[John F. Eldredge]

Just because a tract of land is being used for forestry doesn't mean it 
won't have streams on it, and low spots may have ponds.



On April 10, 2017 2:36:20 PM Kevin Kenny  wrote:


On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer 

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Kevin Kenny]

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

> landuse =forest. areas used to grow and log trees (actual current human
> use of land), a pond would not be included but a clearcut area still
> dedicated to growing trees would.
>

In beaver country, there's nothing inconsistent about a pond in
landuse=forest. It might grow trees perfectly well if it gets a period of
low beaver activity, and that may be the intention of the land manager.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 10. Apr 2017, at 07:17, Clifford Snow  wrote:
> 
> Any suggestions on how we should be mapping forested areas would be 
> appreciated. 


my suggestion is to map the following 3 aspects (not necessarily in the same 
osm feature, but orthogonally, also overlapping if required):

natural=*. the named feature/forest, also nested smaller ones inside bigger 
ones. This is for toponyms and geographic features, e.g. a pond in the forest 
would be included 

landuse =forest. areas used to grow and log trees (actual current human use of 
land), a pond would not be included but a clearcut area still dedicated to 
growing trees would.

landcover=trees
all kind of areas where trees grow (physical aspect)

cheers,
Martin 



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Vao Matua]

I think this is a great solution.
It is not possible to over-estimate the amount of work and skill involved
in classification of imagery from any source. It is great for the OSM
community to think that we can map the streets of the world, it is a
different matter to map vegetation types.

Emmor

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Michael Patrick 
wrote:

>
> Have you considered using landsat-8 or sentinel-2 to get current landcover
>> using the QGIS plugin Semi-Automatic Classification? Landviewer [1] has a
>> nice interface for finding imagery that is cloud free and of recent
>> vintage? The learning curve to landcover classification is a bit steep,
>> but
>> it should be sufficiently accurate for remote areas Clifford
>>
>
> Scandanavian Forest services already have extremely detailed web services
> to provide this information ... '*Many users want to see how much forest
> there is in a specified area, estimate its average age, and to see which
> tree species it contains. SLU Forest Map contains spatial information with
> a high degree of detail over most of Sweden's forestland. SLU Forest Map is
> based on a combination of data from the Swedish National Forest Inventory
> 
> and satellite data 
> ...  SLU Forest Map is available free of charge as either a download or
> within our web based GIS application.*'
>
> ... including delivery to *MineCraft* ...  ('Examples of the use of open
> geodata in Minecraft
> ')
> ... now that's Open Data!
>
> My guess is the permits for future operations are online also. Such an
> inventory is is a non-trivial task
> ,
> especially maintaining it.
>
> A better way to handle this would be a federated page that layers OSM and
> the forestry web service(s).
>
> Michael Patrick
> Data Ferret
> OSM Seattle
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Mattias Dalkvist]

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Michael Patrick 
wrote:

>
> Have you considered using landsat-8 or sentinel-2 to get current landcover
>> using the QGIS plugin Semi-Automatic Classification? Landviewer [1] has a
>> nice interface for finding imagery that is cloud free and of recent
>> vintage? The learning curve to landcover classification is a bit steep,
>> but
>> it should be sufficiently accurate for remote areas Clifford
>>
>
> Scandanavian Forest services already have extremely detailed web services
> to provide this information ... '*Many users want to see how much forest
> there is in a specified area, estimate its average age, and to see which
> tree species it contains. SLU Forest Map contains spatial information with
> a high degree of detail over most of Sweden's forestland. SLU Forest Map is
> based on a combination of data from the Swedish National Forest Inventory
> 
> and satellite data 
> ...  SLU Forest Map is available free of charge as either a download or
> within our web based GIS application.*'
>
> ... including delivery to *MineCraft* ...  ('Examples of the use of open
> geodata in Minecraft
> ')
> ... now that's Open Data!
>
> My guess is the permits for future operations are online also. Such an
> inventory is is a non-trivial task
> ,
> especially maintaining it.
>
> A better way to handle this would be a federated page that layers OSM and
> the forestry web service(s).
>
>
This is why I started to think about this, the data about forest harvest in
Sweden is under a CCBY like licence, but I wanted to get a better
understanding how to tag it before contacting them and see if we can import
the data in to OSM.

-- 
Mattias
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Michael Patrick]

> Have you considered using landsat-8 or sentinel-2 to get current landcover
> using the QGIS plugin Semi-Automatic Classification? Landviewer [1] has a
> nice interface for finding imagery that is cloud free and of recent
> vintage? The learning curve to landcover classification is a bit steep, but
> it should be sufficiently accurate for remote areas Clifford
>

Scandanavian Forest services already have extremely detailed web services
to provide this information ... '*Many users want to see how much forest
there is in a specified area, estimate its average age, and to see which
tree species it contains. SLU Forest Map contains spatial information with
a high degree of detail over most of Sweden's forestland. SLU Forest Map is
based on a combination of data from the Swedish National Forest Inventory

and satellite data 
...  SLU Forest Map is available free of charge as either a download or
within our web based GIS application.*'

... including delivery to *MineCraft* ...  ('Examples of the use of open
geodata in Minecraft
')
... now that's Open Data!

My guess is the permits for future operations are online also. Such an
inventory is is a non-trivial task
,
especially maintaining it.

A better way to handle this would be a federated page that layers OSM and
the forestry web service(s).

Michael Patrick
Data Ferret
OSM Seattle
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Warin]

Landcover=wood (or the presently OSM popular 'natural=wood')applies to 
trees of all types, ages, planting densities and heights.

So there are some sub tags that can be used under that land cover.

Harvesting operations are a function of land use (forestry or farm) and 
could be a sub tag under these land uses.


There are some who say that the source tag should not be used, they want 
to rely on the changeset comments, these do carry a date.

Personally I prefer using the source tag.

On 10-Apr-17 04:32 PM, Vao Matua wrote:

Clifford,

You are correct, landuse is different from landcover.
I assume you are tagging farmland as landuse, not landcover.
The problem with landcover is that the currency and consistency of the 
source information is critical and is very difficult in OSM.
The OSM tagging for landcover should have two additional *required* 
tags: "source=" and "source:date=" .


Regards,

Emmor

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Clifford Snow 
> wrote:



On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Vao Matua > wrote:

This is an interesting discussion. As a tree farmer and
professional forester I am offended by the suggestion that a
harvested area is different landuse from areas that are in
other stages of forest growth.
I understand the need to avoid current logging operations, but
I would say that crowd sourced mapping is not the place to get
that information. There are so many basic features missing
from OSM, spending effort to collect vegetative landcover
seems like a lower need, especially considering the fact that
in a relatively short period of time the vegetative signature
will be different.


Palolo,
Thank you for your input. If I understand you, landuse=forest is
what the land is being used for while landcover is what's there.
To get a Warin's point, if you want to know if the area was
clearcut recently, we should be using landcover.

We do have a lot of features that need added to OSM. But I always
encourage new mappers to map what they like. Currently I have been
adding farmland to my county. It helps tell the counties story.
Farmland is just part of the story, a big part of the county is
also logging. Right now I'm reluctant to just start adding
forested areas until I learn more. Any suggestions on how we
should be mapping forested areas would be appreciated.

Best,
Clifford


-- 
@osm_seattle

osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us 
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging





___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Vao Matua]

Clifford,

You are correct, landuse is different from landcover.
I assume you are tagging farmland as landuse, not landcover.
The problem with landcover is that the currency and consistency of the
source information is critical and is very difficult in OSM.
The OSM tagging for landcover should have two additional *required* tags:
"source=" and "source:date=" .

Regards,

Emmor

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Clifford Snow 
wrote:

>
> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Vao Matua  wrote:
>
>> This is an interesting discussion.  As a tree farmer and professional
>> forester I am offended by the suggestion that a harvested area is different
>> landuse from areas that are in other stages of forest growth.
>> I understand the need to avoid current logging operations, but I would
>> say that crowd sourced mapping is not the place to get that information.
>> There are so many basic features missing from OSM, spending effort to
>> collect vegetative landcover seems like a lower need, especially
>> considering the fact that in a relatively short period of time the
>> vegetative signature will be different.
>>
>
> Palolo,
> Thank you for your input. If I understand you, landuse=forest is what the
> land is being used for while landcover is what's there. To get a Warin's
> point, if you want to know if the area was clearcut recently, we should be
> using landcover.
>
> We do have a lot of features that need added to OSM. But I always
> encourage new mappers to map what they like. Currently I have been adding
> farmland to my county. It helps tell the counties story. Farmland is just
> part of the story, a big part of the county is also logging. Right now I'm
> reluctant to just start adding forested areas until I learn more. Any
> suggestions on how we should be mapping forested areas would be
> appreciated.
>
> Best,
> Clifford
>
>
> --
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Clifford Snow]

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Vao Matua  wrote:

> This is an interesting discussion.  As a tree farmer and professional
> forester I am offended by the suggestion that a harvested area is different
> landuse from areas that are in other stages of forest growth.
> I understand the need to avoid current logging operations, but I would say
> that crowd sourced mapping is not the place to get that information. There
> are so many basic features missing from OSM, spending effort to collect
> vegetative landcover seems like a lower need, especially considering the
> fact that in a relatively short period of time the vegetative signature
> will be different.
>

Palolo,
Thank you for your input. If I understand you, landuse=forest is what the
land is being used for while landcover is what's there. To get a Warin's
point, if you want to know if the area was clearcut recently, we should be
using landcover.

We do have a lot of features that need added to OSM. But I always encourage
new mappers to map what they like. Currently I have been adding farmland to
my county. It helps tell the counties story. Farmland is just part of the
story, a big part of the county is also logging. Right now I'm reluctant to
just start adding forested areas until I learn more. Any suggestions on how
we should be mapping forested areas would be appreciated.

Best,
Clifford


-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Vao Matua]

This is an interesting discussion.  As a tree farmer and professional
forester I am offended by the suggestion that a harvested area is different
landuse from areas that are in other stages of forest growth.
I understand the need to avoid current logging operations, but I would say
that crowd sourced mapping is not the place to get that information. There
are so many basic features missing from OSM, spending effort to collect
vegetative landcover seems like a lower need, especially considering the
fact that in a relatively short period of time the vegetative signature
will be different.

Emmor Nile
Palolo

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 1:55 AM, Clifford Snow 
wrote:

>
> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I would also like to know when a harvest is planed, so I can avoid the
>> area when that is taking place (traffic, noise and dust).
>>
>> Where an area has been clear felled, replanted and is now thick.. they
>> usually do a selective harvest to thin it out and leave the best trees for
>> future harvest. So there may be a need to tag that too?
>>
>> Other crops of a long term nature? The ones I can think of are all tree
>> related e.g. sandalwood.
>>
>> Satellite imagery is not much use for this.
>
>
> Have you considered using landsat-8 or sentinel-2 to get current landcover
> using the QGIS plugin Semi-Automatic Classification? Landviewer [1] has a
> nice interface for finding imagery that is cloud free and of recent
> vintage? The learning curve to landcover classification is a bit steep, but
> it should be sufficiently accurate for remote areas. I live in an area that
> is next to forested areas that is constantly being clear cut - with only
> logging roads to show human involvement. Being in the US's Pacific
> Northwest, I have to look for late fall to get cloud free imagery.
>
> If you do consider using data you derive, you definitely need to discuss
> it on the import list as well as with your local community.
>
> Clifford
>
> [1] https://lv.eosda.com
>
>
> --
> @osm_seattle
> osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
> OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Clifford Snow]

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I would also like to know when a harvest is planed, so I can avoid the
> area when that is taking place (traffic, noise and dust).
>
> Where an area has been clear felled, replanted and is now thick.. they
> usually do a selective harvest to thin it out and leave the best trees for
> future harvest. So there may be a need to tag that too?
>
> Other crops of a long term nature? The ones I can think of are all tree
> related e.g. sandalwood.
>
> Satellite imagery is not much use for this.


Have you considered using landsat-8 or sentinel-2 to get current landcover
using the QGIS plugin Semi-Automatic Classification? Landviewer [1] has a
nice interface for finding imagery that is cloud free and of recent
vintage? The learning curve to landcover classification is a bit steep, but
it should be sufficiently accurate for remote areas. I live in an area that
is next to forested areas that is constantly being clear cut - with only
logging roads to show human involvement. Being in the US's Pacific
Northwest, I have to look for late fall to get cloud free imagery.

If you do consider using data you derive, you definitely need to discuss it
on the import list as well as with your local community.

Clifford

[1] https://lv.eosda.com


-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Warin]

On 09-Apr-17 08:13 PM, Mattias Dalkvist wrote:
I should describe my use case a bit more: When hiking and planing a 
hike (in Scandinavian forests) it is very useful to know/see where the 
clearing (from clearcutting) are. Resent ones have lost of wet tracks 
from the harvesters but also areas that was cleared 5-10 years ago as 
they are often thick with young birch trees.


Basically these areas are part of a larger forest just in the 
beginning of the ~100 year growth cycle and having a way to represent 
at an intermediate detail level is what I'm after. IE more into then 
just forest without having to differentiate the stages, 
ground/scrub/young mixed forest etc. As seeing the differences from 
satellite imaginary can be hard specially when it is not that easy to 
find the date of the imaginary.


--
Dalkvist



That is fine.

I would also like to know when a harvest is planed, so I can avoid the 
area when that is taking place (traffic, noise and dust).


Where an area has been clear felled, replanted and is now thick.. they 
usually do a selective harvest to thin it out and leave the best trees 
for future harvest. So there may be a need to tag that too?


Other crops of a long term nature? The ones I can think of are all tree 
related e.g. sandalwood.


Satellite imagery is not much use for this.
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Mattias Dalkvist]

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:41 PM, Tom Pfeifer  wrote:

> There was a longer discussion about this topic in January this year
> already:
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-January/thread.html
>
> I think the conclusion was to keep landuse=forest and the dicussion forked
> into subtagging of crops.
>
>
> Don't know how I missed that but having read it things aren't much clearer
:)


On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Possible solutions that can be applied to other 'crops'?
>
> harvesting:start_date=* to state when harvesting commenced
>
> harvesting:method=   *
> Possible values?
> clear_cut (can be applied to many types of crops?)
> selective (can be applied to many types of crops ?)
>
> Here I am trying to get away from timber specific terms, to more generic
> terms.
>

More generic terms sound good, though I don't know what other crops have
growing times long enough for it to be useful.


I should describe my use case a bit more: When hiking and planing a hike
(in Scandinavian forests) it is very useful to know/see where the clearing
(from clearcutting) are. Resent ones have lost of wet tracks from the
harvesters but also areas that was cleared 5-10 years ago as they are often
thick with young birch trees.

Basically these areas are part of a larger forest just in the beginning of
the ~100 year growth cycle and having a way to represent at an intermediate
detail level is what I'm after. IE more into then just forest without
having to differentiate the stages, ground/scrub/young mixed forest etc. As
seeing the differences from satellite imaginary can be hard specially when
it is not that easy to find the date of the imaginary.

-- 
Dalkvist
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Warin]

On 08-Apr-17 04:42 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone


On 7. Apr 2017, at 23:41, Tom Pfeifer  wrote:

I think the conclusion was to keep landuse=forest and the dicussion forked into 
subtagging of crops.


you can distinguish different states also with "landcover"


Not if harvesting oranges or selectively logging timber for example.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 7. Apr 2017, at 23:41, Tom Pfeifer  wrote:
> 
> I think the conclusion was to keep landuse=forest and the dicussion forked 
> into subtagging of crops.


you can distinguish different states also with "landcover" 


cheers,
Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Tom Pfeifer]

There was a longer discussion about this topic in January this year already:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-January/thread.html

I think the conclusion was to keep landuse=forest and the dicussion forked into 
subtagging of crops.

On 07.04.2017 20:56, Mattias Dalkvist wrote:

Hi

What are the options for tagging forest areas that have been harvested/clear 
cut?

Searching the wiki I found:

landuse=logging many with logging=clearcutting or logging=selective_cutting or 
logging:start_date=*
18k uses mostly Eastern Europe  and Russia

man_made=clearcut almost all with natural=scrub
2k uses mostly in Europe


I don't like a new landuse, in my mind the area is still being used for 
forestry. man_made feels
forces and perhaps it is a language/translation thing but I would never use 
scrub describe the young
trees that grows after a clearcut.

I think I'm after landuse=forest with some sub tag describing that the area was 
harvested and when.

--
Dalkvist



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Warin]

On 08-Apr-17 04:56 AM, Mattias Dalkvist wrote:

Hi

What are the options for tagging forest areas that have been 
harvested/clear cut?


Searching the wiki I found:

landuse=logging many with logging=clearcutting or 
logging=selective_cutting or logging:start_date=*

18k uses mostly Eastern Europe  and Russia

man_made=clearcut almost all with natural=scrub
2k uses mostly in Europe


I don't like a new landuse, in my mind the area is still being used 
for forestry. man_made feels forces and perhaps it is a 
language/translation thing but I would never use scrub describe the 
young trees that grows after a clearcut.


I too don't like it. Will they do the same with farmland? Orchards?


I think I'm after landuse=forest with some sub tag describing that the 
area was harvested and when.


--
Dalkvist


Possible solutions that can be applied to other 'crops'?

harvesting:start_date=* to state when harvesting commenced

harvesting:method=   *
Possible values?
clear_cut (can be applied to many types of crops?)
selective (can be applied to many types of crops ?)

Here I am trying to get away from timber specific terms, to more generic 
terms.



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Mattias Dalkvist]

Hi

What are the options for tagging forest areas that have been
harvested/clear cut?

Searching the wiki I found:

landuse=logging many with logging=clearcutting or logging=selective_cutting
or logging:start_date=*
18k uses mostly Eastern Europe  and Russia

man_made=clearcut almost all with natural=scrub
2k uses mostly in Europe


I don't like a new landuse, in my mind the area is still being used for
forestry. man_made feels forces and perhaps it is a language/translation
thing but I would never use scrub describe the young trees that grows after
a clearcut.

I think I'm after landuse=forest with some sub tag describing that the area
was harvested and when.

-- 
Dalkvist
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging