The definitive characteristic of US "National Forests" is that they are administered/managed by the US National Forest Service.[5] Thus US "National Forests" are administrative areas. Areas where the National Forest Service has some jurisdiction and responsibility. However, "National Forests are categorized by the US as IUCN Category VI protected areas (Managed Resource Protected Area)" [2]. Therefore, tagging them as protected areas is appropriate (not withstanding the fact that not much in a National Forest seems protected based upon my visit to a section of the Roosevelt National Forest yesterday).
The common meaning of "forest" is "a large tract of land covered with trees and underbrush; woodland"[1] However, many parts of US National Forests do not have trees, and either will never have trees, or will not have them for many decades, and therefore are not "forested" * Many ski resorts are within National Forests, e.g. [3]. Areas occupied by buildings, parking lots and most ski runs do not have trees and are not likely to for many years. * Areas above treeline do not have trees and will probably not have trees for centuries. * Meadows, prairies, lakes/reservoirs, areas of scree and mines[4] are all found within National Forests and no or few trees will exist in these areas Therefore significant parts of National Forests are not being "used" as a "forest" and tagging them as "landuse=forest" is not appropriate in my opinion. Mike [1] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/forest [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Forest [3] http://www.skiloveland.com/ - note Forest Service Logo at the bottom of the page [4] http://www.mining-law-reform.info/california.htm [5] Definition: "National Forest System land—all lands, waters, or interests therein administered by the Forest Service" https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/36/251.51 > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us