[Tagging] Mapping deforestation

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Tue Mar 12 00:07:23 UTC 2019


On 12/03/19 10:18, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> > “We will would like to map land cover in an area near the Amazonian 
> forest”
>
> I’d recommend that you start by mapping the existing forested areas 
> with natural=wood or landuse=forest,
 From aerial imagery I would recommend you  do not use landuse=forest as 
it cannot be determined if the area has some human use to the tress. Use 
natural=wood and if you desire landcover=trees.
> and areas of water with natural=water and water=lake / =river, or 
> natural=wetland for swamps, marshes, mangroves, bogs, etc.
>
> If you can clearly identify other types of vegetation (from aerial 
> imagery, I assume?) there are several specific tags that can be used. 
> You should not tag something non-specific like “clearing” or “bare 
> ground”.
>
> Natural=scrub is used for areas mainly covered shrubs or bushes, eg 
> woody plants about 1m to 3m in height, natura=heath is for dwarf 
> shrubs (probably only found in the high Andes on Colombia), 
> natural=grassland can be used for alpine areas above the treeline 
> (though these may also be heath or wetland=bog). Areas of rocky land 
> without vegetation can be natural=bare_rock, =sand, =scree, =shingle
>
> The most relevant tags for landcover with heavy human use in Colombia 
> might be landuse=orchard for palm oil, banana, and coffee plantations, 
> landuse=farmland for seasonal or annual crops, landuse=meadow for 
> pasture and hay fields, landuse=residential / =industrial for 
> developed areas with houses / industry.
>
> The idea should be to map as specifically as possible. If you are not 
> certain of the type of vegetation or landuse for a certain area, then 
> leave that place untagged for now. Someday a local person can add the 
> proper tagging by visiting that place in person.
>
> Re: the landcover tags. These have not been approved by the community, 
> though there is a small, vocal minority that wants to use them instead 
> of the established tags that start with landuse= and natural=. I would 
> not use these, because there are much more widely used equivalents 
> that are approved or in use for many years.
>
> Don’t use landcover=trees; use natural=wood or landuse=forest.

There is nothing wrong with dual tagging...  use both natural=wood and 
landcover=trees, for example of a tree area, indicates what is there in 
as clear a manner as possible.

Nit picking - landuse=* should only be used to indicate the human use of 
the land, it should not indicate a land cover.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190312/a5974140/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list