[Tagging] Forestry/logging

[Clifford Snow]

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Vao Matua <vaomatua at gmail.com> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20170409/21d22717/attachment.html>