[talk-au] What do you prefer for Barmah-Millewa: swamp or wood?

[Little Maps]

Hello everyone, I don’t know if there is any right / wrong answer to this question, hence I’m keen to know your preferences...

I’m mapping wetlands and vegetation along the Murray River upstream of Yarrawonga, and am now mapping in Millewa forest. Millewa (in NSW) and Barmah forest (in Vic) support large red gum forests which flood regularly. Some areas flood annually, others less frequently. It depends on how much water flows down the Murray and which stream regulators in the forests are opened or closed.

My question is: would it be better to map this as a forest (i.e. natural=wood) or as a ‘swamp’, which OSM defines as ‘an area of waterlogged forest, with dense vegetation’, tagged as natural=wetland, wetland=swamp, seasonal=yes. I’ve read the OSM wiki pages on both options.

I’ve made a first stab at the area 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/-35.8026/145.1484
and have mapped all but the extremes as swamp as this indicates that the area floods regularly, which natural:wood does not show. However most other areas on the river I’ve come across are mapped as natural:wood with relatively small inliers for treeless wetlands and some treed swamps.

It’s a quick job to change from wetland:swamp to natural:wood and vice versa and I don’t hold any strong preferences myself. If the general consensus is that the area would be better called a wood (i.e. forest) rather than a seasonal wetland I’ll change it immediately.
 
(I haven’t mapped Barmah forest in Vic, as that was already mapped as natural:wood but much of Barmah actually floods even more frequently than Millewa).

Thanks very much for your advice. Best wishes Ian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20200512/91cd8393/attachment.htm>