On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 17:26:27 -0400 Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can understand the desire for distinct tagging. > > Certainly, it's much tougher to navigate a field of blowdown / prone > forest like > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ke9tv/14738421885/ > than it is to walk through a standing forest. Also - it may be useful for orientation and during hiking trip one may prefer to route going through existing forest rather area where forest was destroyed. > Nevertheless, they are both landuse=forest (if managed for forestry) Many of areas that may be tagged this way are not managed for forestry but in protected areas. Areas managed for forestry are typically cleaned-up and replanted relatively quickly. Note that typical usage and interpretation of landuse=forest is "area covered by trees" not "area managed for forestry" (though I know that there are competing approaches - see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Forest ). _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
