[Talk-GB] Missing Nature Reserves: umap

SK53 sk53.osm at gmail.com
Thu Oct 22 10:54:17 UTC 2015


Hi Greg,

I've added names in the popup for everything but English LNRs (for some
reason the dataset I used didn't have names).

I've deliberately not shown existing OSM data, nor reconciled where a
nature reserve exists but the boundaries are out of kilter with the
official sources. A good example is Kingley Vale NNR, where I have refined
the southern boundaries, but the centroid is still outside the current
boundaries mapped on OSM. Kingley Vale, like many NRs has some outlying
sections.

The data I uploaded may included multiple polygons so places like Rum NNR &
St Kilda appear many times. I have added the Rum NNR as a separate relation
using the same ways as the island, but this has the unfortunate consequence
that the NNR name appears rather than the island name. Quite a few other
places, such as Richmond Park, are also NNRs, and leisure tags clash.

Jerry

On 22 October 2015 at 11:11, Gregory <nomoregrapes at googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi Jerry,
>
> I just came across the quarterly project and your uMap via the Weekly OSM
> blog.
>
> It would be nice to have:
> * markers where there is a match with OSM (makes me feel good on behalf of
> Durham mappers, even if you don't update it).
> * names or some other info on the pop-up (help me find it, help me at
> least tag on OSM a small area that can be expanded/corrected as I improve
> the surrounding area/landuse).
>
> I've been slowly mapping field boundaries around Durham. It's not my
> primary interest due to detail & slowness, but I feel it's good data to add
> to footpaths. Weather-dependent I could certainly cycle out to confirm
> evidence of some nature reserves.
>
> Presumably we'll be able to easily count the nature reserves at New Year
> and now the difference in number?
> Is anyone tagging their changesets with something like
> project=gb_quarterly? Or apparently hashtags in changeset comments is a
> thing now.
>
> From a sunny Durham,
> Gregory (LivingWithDragons)
>
>
>
>
> On 5 October 2015 at 15:54, SK53 <sk53.osm at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I've had a quick go using the Natural England & Scottish Natural Heritage
>> files to identify potentially missing (or missing bits of) Nature Reserves
>> in England & Scotland. (Welsh data is definitely not open).
>>
>> All I did was check to see if the centroid of a nature reserve from one
>> of the national datasets fell inside an OSM polygon. Works most of the
>> time, but not for the odd funny shaped reserves. The files were polygons so
>> complex NRs which are missing appear multiple times (see St Kilda, Rum etc).
>>
>> National Nature Reserves I've shown in red, Local ones in blue.
>> umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/potential-missing-local-nature-reserves-on-osm_55319#10/51.5933/-0.1744
>>
>> There are a few large ones which it should be easy to sort out (Richmond
>> Park for instance), but many others will require a bit of sleuthing to
>> identify their boundaries without using the shape files. Personally I'd
>> rather see boundaries based on surveys, particularly when the boundary
>> corresponds to other on-the-ground features.
>>
>> Jerry
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Gregory
> osm at livingwithdragons.com
> http://www.livingwithdragons.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20151022/6624bdd3/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list