[Tagging] Using Corine Land Cover definitions for land cover in OSM?

Sun Oct 20 11:53:22 UTC 2019

Landcover classification systems do not match directly with current
OpenStreetMap data and tagging. Our tagging system developed
organically, based on what people would call map features in ordinary
British English, so we have tags like natural=wood, rather than
natural=wetland, natural=heath, rather than =dra

If you check the wiki page
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landcover you can see how the
current tags fit with a couple of systems: NLCD92 (National Land Cover
Database) and LCCS (Land Cover Classification System ) - neither are a
very close match. It looks like the CLC (Corine_Land_Cover) system is
a mix of landuse and landcover classes, and it's less specific than
many of the current Openstreetmap tags.

"Sparsely vegetated area" could be scrub, sparse heath, or other types
of vegetation like sparse grasses, or if it's really sparse we could
map the underlying minera: natural=sand, natural=scree,
natural=bare_rock, or bare soil. See
https://land.copernicus.eu/user-corner/technical-library/corine-land-cover-nomenclature-guidelines/html/index-clc-333.html

The CLC is based on 1:100.000 scale satellite imagery, so it can't be
as specific as what OpenStreetMap users can tag with local knowledge
and aerial imagery.

The areas I'm thinking of are eroded, bare soil (a mix of sand, silt,
small stones and sometimes clay) without vegetation. They fit under
LCCS B16." Bare Areas", specifically "A5. Bare Soil" - but since such
areas are rare in most of Europe, and are usually found in sparsely
populated areas, they have rarely been mapped.

I'm thinking that natural=badlands is good to describe the whole area
of eroded terrain, which also implies lack of vegetation and exposed
soil (not solid rock, stones or sand), but I also think it might be
good to have a general tag for natural areas of exposed, dry soil.

On 10/20/19, Alessandro Sarretta <alessandro.sarretta at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not against natural=badlands for areas that are covered by a non
> vegetated surface in an erosive context with steep slopes (as per
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Badlands). Anyway they seem to be a more
> specific case than a "simple" bare soil.
>
> I think that, in general, when dealing with land cover things in
> OpenStreetMap, we should really try and use some knowledge from standard
> definitions, e.g. Corine Land Cover CLC). I see that there is already a
> page defining connections between OSM elements and CLC classes [1]
>
> In the case of /badlands/, they are mentioned as one of the examples in
> /3.3.3. Sparsely vegetated areas/ [2].
>
> I'm quite new in discussions about land cover in OSM, but wouldn't it be
> useful to add, in addition to OSM-specific tags like natural=bare_rock,
> natural=shingle,  natural=scree, ... a tag to reference standard land
> cover classification?
>
> I see that a tag /CLC:code /[3] already exists and used more than 300000
> times, but it seems to be used only in case of imports and it is
> suggested (with a very weak motivation, IMHO) to be deleted after
> editing those areas after import.
>
> In the example of badlands, would it be useful to have both
> /natural=badlands /(or any other agreed OSM-spefici tag) + /CLC:code=333
> and//or /land_cover=sparsely_vegetated_areas /?
>
> I see many useful uses coming from this.. but I could be wrong...
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Ale
>
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Corine_Land_Cover
>
> [2]
> https://land.copernicus.eu/user-corner/technical-library/corine-land-cover-nomenclature-guidelines/html/index-clc-333.html
>
> [3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:CLC:code
>
>
> On 20/10/19 07:31, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>> Perhaps the term “badlands” is only used in a North America. Wikipedia
>> has a description:
>>
>> "Badlands are a type of dry terrain where softer sedimentary rocks and
>> clay-rich soils have been extensively eroded by wind and water. ...
>> They are characterized by steep slopes, minimal vegetation" and thin
>> soil - but not exposed bedrock, usually.
>>
>> Photo examples:
>>
>> 1) Chinle Badlands, Utah:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chinle_Badlands.jpg
>> 2) Badlands near Coober Pedy in central Australia:
>> https://www.alamy.com/the-badlands-area-near-coober-pedy-in-central-australia-image67285952.html
>> 3) Drum Badlands, Alberta:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Drumbadlands.jpg
>> 4) Las Médulas, Spain:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Panorámica_de_Las_Médulas.jpg
>> 5) Valle de la Luna, Argentina:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:P1010357_1.JPG
>> 6) Badlands National Park, South Dakota:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Badlands00503.JPG
>>
>> - Joseph
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 11:14 AM Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 20/10/19 11:19, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>>>> How should areas of bare soil, such as badlands, be tagged?
>>>>
>>>> Currently there are documented tags for dry areas of bedrock, stones and
>>>> sand:
>>>>
>>>> natural=bare_rock, natural=shingle,  natural=scree, and natural=sand
>>>>
>>>> For tidal areas, beaches and wetlands there's also natural=beach,
>>>> natural=shoal and wetland=mud
>>>>
>>>> However, there's no documented, common tag for dry areas of exposed
>>>> clay, silt or mixed soil.
>>>>
>>>> natural=badlands has been used 5 times, but this is rather specific
>>>> and may not be well-known outside of North America:
>>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=badlands
>>>>
>>>> natural=desert is common, but includes all kinds of vegetated and
>>>> unvegetated arid areas; many of these can be tagged with natural=
>>>> grassland, heath, scrub, sand, scree etc.
>>> Desert is a climate, not a land cover nor a land form. Some deserts
>>> include 'lakes'.
>>>
>>> The key natural has climate, land form and land cover all in the one
>>> tagging scheme, I don't think is is a good scheme and would be better
>>> separated into the individual things it is trying to tag.
>>>
>>>> natural=clay has been used twice:
>>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=clay
>>>>
>>>> natural=earth has been used 20 times:
>>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=earth
>>>>
>>>> natural=bare_earth has 23 uses:
>>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=bare_earth
>>>>
>>>> There's also natural=pebbles with 67 uses
>>>> (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=pebbles)
>>>> and natural=gravel 90 times -
>>>> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=gravel
>>>>
>>>> But most of those could be scree or shingle, which would be more
>>>> specific.
>>>>
>>>> Would it be best to describe the type of soil, like natural=clay,
>>>> =silt, =earth, =pebbles, =gravel?
>>> Better to tag specific things rather than a group.
>>>
>>>> Should mappers use surface=* without another top-level tag?
>>> No.
>>>
>>>> Should natural=bare_earth be used in general for clay and other bare
>>>> soils?
>>>>
>>>> Or is natural=badlands best to describe the specific feature of an
>>>> arid area where the bare soil is exposed due to erosion?
>>> I have no idea of what 'badlands' are .. from your information it is not
>>> single land cover nor a land form.
>>> So it is a climate? A climate that causes erosion to a bare surface? No
>>> vegetation?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>