Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Craig Feuerherdt wrote: > I believe the Australian guidelines have been derived from international > guidelines. The "natural=" and "landuse=" tags are confusing on the wiki as > they switch between land use and land cover (as defined above). It would be > good to document the Australian definition of the current tags so we get > some consistency. I am happy to start something if others wish to > contribute. > > For the purpose of OSM I believe land use and land cover are the 2 > important things. (Not too fussed with land cover at this stage, more > interested in defining the boundary of the parks). I am happy to attribute > polygons as generic administrative boundaries for the moment as we can > always come back and attribute them as National, State etc parks later. > That all looks pretty sensible, though not sure whether "land management" concerns us. Please do set up a list in the wiki giving some suggested tags that we can argue over. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
I am well aware of the issues between contradictory use of the term landuse. I am currently involved in a project with the State Government re setting up a "Land Use Information System". The definitions they have adopted are as follows; *Land use* - Land use means the purpose to which the land cover is committed. Some land uses, such as agriculture, have a characteristic land cover pattern. These usually appear in land cover classifications. Other land uses, such as nature conservation, are not readily discriminated by a characteristic land cover pattern. For example, where the land cover is woodland, land use may be timber production or nature conservation. *Land tenure* - Tenure is the form of an interest in land. Some forms of tenure (such as pastoral leases or nature conservation reserves) relate directly to land use and land management practice. *Land cover* - Land cover refers to the physical surface of the earth, including various combinations of vegetation types, soils, exposed rocks and water bodies as well as anthropogenic elements, such as agriculture and built environments. Land cover classes can usually be discriminated by characteristic patterns using remote sensing. *Land management practice* - Land management practice means the approach taken to achieve a land use outcome - the 'how' of land use (eg cultivation practices, such as minimum tillage and direct drilling). Some land management practices, such as stubble disposal practices and tillage rotation systems, may be discriminated by characteristic land cover patterns and linked to particular issues. *FROM: Guidelines for land use mapping in Australia: principles, procedures and definitions, Edition 3, Commonwealth of Australia, 2006* I believe the Australian guidelines have been derived from international guidelines. The "natural=" and "landuse=" tags are confusing on the wiki as they switch between land use and land cover (as defined above). It would be good to document the Australian definition of the current tags so we get some consistency. I am happy to start something if others wish to contribute. For the purpose of OSM I believe land use and land cover are the 2 important things. (Not too fussed with land cover at this stage, more interested in defining the boundary of the parks). I am happy to attribute polygons as generic administrative boundaries for the moment as we can always come back and attribute them as National, State etc parks later. Craig 2010/1/5 Craig Feuerherdt : > > John is right about the distinction between the "landuse" & "natural" > tags. > > "landuse" is about what is on the ground (trees, farming etc). I am > assuming > > national/state/other parks/areas should be attributed with the "natural" > > tag, but "natural=what"? > > This has been discussed several times on the main list. The problem > is that landuse is used for two (sometimes contradictory) purposes - > what is one the ground (cover) and what it is used for (use). Some > landuse tags are one, some the other, some are both. There is a bit of > a push to try and sort this out, but nothing has come of it yet that I > know about. > > For large parks, I would think that you would want to map the > boundaries as an admin boundary, and the landuse of the various parts > of the park as a separate issue. It's not uncommon to have a single > large batch of trees, some of which are in a park and some not, or in > a separate park (eg one national and one state). And to have various > parts of a park to have different landuse - recreation areas, natural > preserves, etc. > > Stephen > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
2010/1/5 Craig Feuerherdt : > John is right about the distinction between the "landuse" & "natural" tags. > "landuse" is about what is on the ground (trees, farming etc). I am assuming > national/state/other parks/areas should be attributed with the "natural" > tag, but "natural=what"? This has been discussed several times on the main list. The problem is that landuse is used for two (sometimes contradictory) purposes - what is one the ground (cover) and what it is used for (use). Some landuse tags are one, some the other, some are both. There is a bit of a push to try and sort this out, but nothing has come of it yet that I know about. For large parks, I would think that you would want to map the boundaries as an admin boundary, and the landuse of the various parts of the park as a separate issue. It's not uncommon to have a single large batch of trees, some of which are in a park and some not, or in a separate park (eg one national and one state). And to have various parts of a park to have different landuse - recreation areas, natural preserves, etc. Stephen ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
2010/1/5 Craig Feuerherdt : > John is right about the distinction between the "landuse" & "natural" tags. > "landuse" is about what is on the ground (trees, farming etc). I am assuming > national/state/other parks/areas should be attributed with the "natural" > tag, but "natural=what"? Depends what's on the ground, I'm guessing simpson desert would be natural=sand... > A standard for a "jurisdiction" tag is one element. I think we also need to I might be wrong, but shouldn't jurisdiction have it's own polygon boundary? That is, it would be an inner boundary for what ever state, and outer boundary for itself, or federal or ... > add a "type" tag ie type=National Park. Will take a look on > data.australia.gov.au and see if I can find the classification and then post > it on the wiki. The classification stuff was posted to this list, not from data.australia.gov.au, it turned up when someone went looking on how to tag these areas. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
As Jim points out this is a 'hairy' issue (having had some experience with it when working in the Victoria state government). The name is not sufficient to distinguish the different categories of parks/reserves etc. John is right about the distinction between the "landuse" & "natural" tags. "landuse" is about what is on the ground (trees, farming etc). I am assuming national/state/other parks/areas should be attributed with the "natural" tag, but "natural=what"? A standard for a "jurisdiction" tag is one element. I think we also need to add a "type" tag ie type=National Park. Will take a look on data.australia.gov.au and see if I can find the classification and then post it on the wiki. cheers 2010/1/4 John Smith > 2010/1/4 Jim Croft : > > yep - and my point was that although many parks are called national, > > the aren't. Royal, Namadgi, etc. > > > > In the mix we also have, wilderness areas, reserves, natural heritage > > arras and nature reserves of various descriptions. > > > > I think there might be an international classification/ontology of > > protected areas. Will have a look for it... > > There is, was posted to this list just after data.australia.gov.au > went online with the national parks etc data... > ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
On 04/01/2010, at 9:57 PM, Steve Bennett wrote: > . Ok, there are a few issues. First, "natural=" just describes what's on the > land, like trees or not, so isn't useful. The right tag would be something > like "landuse=reserve", although this appears to be still under debate: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Nature_reserve I've been using boundary=national_park[0] for these, even if they're not strictly National Parks (e.g. state reserves, forest reserves, etc). > I would be less interested in tagging who manages it, and more interested in > tagging the legislation that appears to it. Afaik, "national park" has a > specific legal meaning, even if all Victiorion NPs are managed by Parks > Victoria etc. My understanding is that National Parks fall under commonwealth legislation and the others under various pieces of state legislation. Coming up with a consistent tagging is going to be all sorts of fun due to the differences between places. Tasmania for example has 7 different types of reserve[1] plus all the other parks and marine areas, and Victoria has 14 in total[2]. Maybe something like park=au.tas:game_reserve? > So far I've been tagging them fairly indiscriminately as leisure=park, but > giving them the full title in their name, on the basis that it will be fairly > easy to mass update them once we work out an appropriate tagging scheme. [0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dnational_park [1] http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/index.aspx?base=5710 [2] http://www.parkweb.vic.gov.au/1parks.cfm ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Dale wrote: > "How do we distinguish between National Parks, State Parks, State > Forests and > the like? > Have started adding forest areas from the landsat imagery and have been > attributing as "natural=wood", but I haven't found anything that > would allow > me to better distinguish these areas. Obviously a National park is > totally > different from a State Park in terms of what can/not be done. It > would also > be good to link the polygons off to the relevant web site (such as > www.parkweb.vic.gov.au in the case of Victoria). > This issue isn't as simple as stipulating a "manager" because some > National > Parks not managed by Parks Victoria etc. > Thoughts? > Cheers" > Boy, the replies to this question were seriously off-base. Ok, there are a few issues. First, "natural=" just describes what's on the land, like trees or not, so isn't useful. The right tag would be something like "landuse=reserve", although this appears to be still under debate: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Nature_reserve Separately there is the question of how to distinguish state parks from national parks etc. I don't think there's a proper tag for this yet, but if there were, it might be "nature_reserve=state_park". Presumably most countries have something equivalent. I would be less interested in tagging who manages it, and more interested in tagging the legislation that appears to it. Afaik, "national park" has a specific legal meaning, even if all Victiorion NPs are managed by Parks Victoria etc. So far I've been tagging them fairly indiscriminately as leisure=park, but giving them the full title in their name, on the basis that it will be fairly easy to mass update them once we work out an appropriate tagging scheme. Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
"How do we distinguish between National Parks, State Parks, State Forests and the like? Have started adding forest areas from the landsat imagery and have been attributing as "natural=wood", but I haven't found anything that would allow me to better distinguish these areas. Obviously a National park is totally different from a State Park in terms of what can/not be done. It would also be good to link the polygons off to the relevant web site (such as www.parkweb.vic.gov.au in the case of Victoria). This issue isn't as simple as stipulating a "manager" because some National Parks not managed by Parks Victoria etc. Thoughts? Cheers" In Victoria the National Parks Act 1975 (NPA) describes a number of different land tenures: National Parks State Parks (to all intents identical in terms of what can be done/ not done to NPs by regulation) Marine National Parks Marine Sanctuaries and a couple of others. The boundaries of the parks are described by a combination of the Act and the Certified Plan of each park. DSE website (www.dse.vic.gov.au) has PDF copies of the Cert plans. In Victoria all scheduled parks under the NPA are managed by Parks Victoria. There are a large number of other reserves with varying descriptors that are managed by PV. These are described by a wide range of Victorian legislation. To simply matter there is a master spatial dataset that describes each reserve/park and its boundaries for all of Victoria (ParkRes). I'd try getting hold of that via means legitimate. Write to DSE as the data custodian and see how you go. You could ask for Crown land tenure while you are at it. To see this data in a spatial format go to DSE online mapping applications and have a look at the data there. eg: http://nremap-sc.nre.vic.gov.au/MapShare.v2/imf.jsp?site=forestexplorer I'd echo others that the best way of identifying land tenure in the case of protected areas is by name. I'd stay away from the detail of zoning (what you can and cannot do ) within parks until the day comes all the boundaries are shown!The situation gets more confusing as the international use of National Park can cover all sorts of land tenure (Including private land) Ditto with other conventions. Write to me directly for more info. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
ok - world database of protected areas - database is available for download http://www.wdpa.org/ it's a UN thing so it is almost certainly available for public use in a (c) sense. the IUCN management categories are here http://www.unep-wcmc.org/protected_areas/categories/index.html jim On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Liz wrote: > On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, Jim Croft wrote: >> I think there might be an international classification/ontology of >> protected areas. Will have a look for it... >> > now that is against the spirit of the OSM wiki isn't it? > you can't use any outside material. > it must be copyright so we will invent our own classification :^ > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > -- _ Jim Croft ~ jim.cr...@gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~ http://www.google.com/profiles/jim.croft 'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point of doubtful sanity.' - Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
2010/1/4 Jim Croft : > yep - and my point was that although many parks are called national, > the aren't. Royal, Namadgi, etc. > > In the mix we also have, wilderness areas, reserves, natural heritage > arras and nature reserves of various descriptions. > > I think there might be an international classification/ontology of > protected areas. Will have a look for it... There is, was posted to this list just after data.australia.gov.au went online with the national parks etc data... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, Jim Croft wrote: > I think there might be an international classification/ontology of > protected areas. Will have a look for it... > now that is against the spirit of the OSM wiki isn't it? you can't use any outside material. it must be copyright so we will invent our own classification :^ ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
yep - and my point was that although many parks are called national, the aren't. Royal, Namadgi, etc. In the mix we also have, wilderness areas, reserves, natural heritage arras and nature reserves of various descriptions. I think there might be an international classification/ontology of protected areas. Will have a look for it... jim On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 7:57 PM, John Smith wrote: > 2010/1/4 Jim Croft : >> Careful with NI, CI and JB - the entire territory is not national park. > > I was just pointing out they were outside territory of the states, and > listed as federal/capital territory, even if the national park doesn't > take up the entire area... > -- _ Jim Croft ~ jim.cr...@gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~ http://www.google.com/profiles/jim.croft 'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point of doubtful sanity.' - Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
2010/1/4 Jim Croft : > Careful with NI, CI and JB - the entire territory is not national park. I was just pointing out they were outside territory of the states, and listed as federal/capital territory, even if the national park doesn't take up the entire area... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
Careful with NI, CI and JB - the entire territory is not national park. jim On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 7:35 PM, John Smith wrote: > 2010/1/4 Jim Croft : >> does not work... >> >> only a handful of the named national parks are of national >> jurisdiction and management (Uluru, Kakadu, Booderee, Norfolk and >> Christmas Island, etc.) The majority are run be the States and >> Territories. >> >> For clarity, a separate jurisdiction tag would be required. > > Norfolk Island and Christmas Island most of those are tagged as > Australian external territories, but not tagged with a state tag. > > Jervis Bay is tagged as federal territory, not state... > -- _ Jim Croft ~ jim.cr...@gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~ http://www.google.com/profiles/jim.croft 'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point of doubtful sanity.' - Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
2010/1/4 Liz : > On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, John Smith wrote: >> State forests are usually state owned logging areas. >> > here they aren't used for logging, they are actually areas of remnant > vegetation without the difficulties of use encountered in National Parks. Fair enough, the greenies are pushing for the Qld govt to lock up large amounts of state forests as national parks... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, John Smith wrote: > State forests are usually state owned logging areas. > here they aren't used for logging, they are actually areas of remnant vegetation without the difficulties of use encountered in National Parks. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
2010/1/4 Jim Croft : > does not work... > > only a handful of the named national parks are of national > jurisdiction and management (Uluru, Kakadu, Booderee, Norfolk and > Christmas Island, etc.) The majority are run be the States and > Territories. > > For clarity, a separate jurisdiction tag would be required. Norfolk Island and Christmas Island most of those are tagged as Australian external territories, but not tagged with a state tag. Jervis Bay is tagged as federal territory, not state... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
does not work... only a handful of the named national parks are of national jurisdiction and management (Uluru, Kakadu, Booderee, Norfolk and Christmas Island, etc.) The majority are run be the States and Territories. For clarity, a separate jurisdiction tag would be required. jim On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 7:02 PM, John Smith wrote: > 2010/1/4 Craig Feuerherdt : >> How do we distinguish between National Parks, State Parks, State Forests and >> the like? > > The name? > > Such and such state park > Such and such national park? > > State forests are usually state owned logging areas. > >> Have started adding forest areas from the landsat imagery and have been >> attributing as "natural=wood", but I haven't found anything that would allow > > Not all national parks are wooded, like > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson_Desert_National_Park > >> me to better distinguish these areas. Obviously a National park is totally >> different from a State Park in terms of what can/not be done. It would also > > That's a land use issue... > > ___ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > -- _ Jim Croft ~ jim.cr...@gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~ http://www.google.com/profiles/jim.croft 'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point of doubtful sanity.' - Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963) ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
2010/1/4 Craig Feuerherdt : > How do we distinguish between National Parks, State Parks, State Forests and > the like? The name? Such and such state park Such and such national park? State forests are usually state owned logging areas. > Have started adding forest areas from the landsat imagery and have been > attributing as "natural=wood", but I haven't found anything that would allow Not all national parks are wooded, like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson_Desert_National_Park > me to better distinguish these areas. Obviously a National park is totally > different from a State Park in terms of what can/not be done. It would also That's a land use issue... ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Distinguish between National, State etc parks
How do we distinguish between National Parks, State Parks, State Forests and the like? Have started adding forest areas from the landsat imagery and have been attributing as "natural=wood", but I haven't found anything that would allow me to better distinguish these areas. Obviously a National park is totally different from a State Park in terms of what can/not be done. It would also be good to link the polygons off to the relevant web site (such as www.parkweb.vic.gov.au in the case of Victoria). This issue isn't as simple as stipulating a "manager" because some National Parks not managed by Parks Victoria etc. Thoughts? Cheers ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
