[Talk-us] [Tagging] Large fire perimeter tagging?

[James Umbanhowar]

Something else to consider is that even though there is a perimeter for
a fire, there can be highly variable impacts on the landcover within
the perimeter.  Some areas may have not burned, other areas only burned
the understory, some with limited burning of trees and other with full
tree killing canopy burns.  The effects of these will also depend on
the specific species that burn.  So to convert and entire area inside a
fire perimeter to one land cover without extensive surveying would
likely be in error.  

It seems as though the perimeter tag is the most verifiable at this
point.

James

On Thu, 2020-09-24 at 15:05 -0700, Clifford Snow wrote:
> Steve,
> Just a reminder, landuse is to tag what the land is used for.
> landuse=forest is for areas that have harvestable wood products, ie
> trees. Just because there was a fire doesn't mean the landuse
> changes. Landcover is a better tag for burnt areas as well as areas
> just clearcut. 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 2:31 PM stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com>
> wrote:
> > I didn't get a single reply on this (see below), which I find
> > surprising, especially as there are currently even larger fires
> > that are more widespread all across the Western United States.
> > 
> > I now ask if there are additional, appropriate polygons with tags
> > I'm not familiar with regarding landcover that might be added to
> > the map (as "landuse=forest" might be strictly true now only in a
> > 'zoning' sense, as many of the actual trees that MAKE these forests
> > have sadly burned down, or substantially so).
> > 
> > Considering that there are literally millions and millions of acres
> > of (newly) burned areas (forest, scrub, grassland, residential,
> > commercial, industrial, public, private...), I'm surprised that OSM
> > doesn't have some well-pondered and actual tags that reflect this
> > situation.  My initial tagging of this (simply tagged, but
> > enormous) polygon as "fire=perimeter" was coined on my part, but as
> > I search wiki, taginfo and Overpass Turbo queries for similar data
> > in the map, I come up empty.
> > 
> > First, do others think it is important that we map these?  I say
> > yes, as this fire has absolutely enormous impact to what we do and
> > might map here, both present and future.  The aftermath of this
> > fire (>85,000 acres this fire alone) will last for decades, and for
> > OSM to not reflect this in the map (somehow, better bolstered than
> > a simple, though huge, polygon tagged with fire=perimeter,
> > start_date and end_date) seems OSM "cartographically misses
> > something."  I know that HOT mappers map the "present- and
> > aftermath-" of humanitarian disasters, I've HOT-participated
> > myself.  So, considering the thousands of structures that burned
> > (most of them homes), tens of thousands of acres which are burn-
> > scarred and distinctly different than their landcover, millions of
> > trees (yes, really) and even landuse is now currently tagged, I
> > look for guidance — beyond the simple tag of fire=perimeter on a
> > large polygon.
> > 
> > Second, if we do choose to "better" map these incidents and results
> > (they are life- and planet-altering on a grand scale) how might we
> > choose to do that?  Do we have landcover tags which could replace
> > landuse=forest or natural=wood with something like
> > natural=fire_scarred?  (I'm making that up, but it or something
> > like it could work).  How and when might we replace these with
> > something less severe?  On the other hand, if it isn't appropriate
> > that we map any of this, please say so.
> > 
> > Thank you, especially any guidance offered from HOT contributors
> > who have worked on post-fire humanitarian disasters,
> > 
> > SteveA
> > California (who has returned home after evacuation, relatively safe
> > now that this fire is 100% contained)
> > 
> > 
> > On Aug 29, 2020, at 7:20 PM, stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Not sure if crossposting to talk-us is correct, but it is a "home
> > list" for me.
> > > 
> > > I've created a large fire perimeter in OSM from public sources, 
> > http://www.osm.org/way/842280873 .  This is a huge fire (sadly,
> > there are larger ones right now, too), over 130 square miles, and
> > caused the evacuation of every third person in my county (yes). 
> > There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of structures, mostly
> > residential homes, which have burned down and the event has
> > "completely changed" giant redwoods in and the character of
> > California's oldest state park (Big Basin).
> > > 
> > > This perimeter significantly affects landuse, landcover and human
> > patterns of movement and activity in this part of the world for a
> > significant time to come.  It is a "major disaster."  I'm curious
> > how HOT teams might delineate such a thing (and I've participated
> > in a HOT fire team, mapping barns, water sources for helicopter
> > dips and other human structures during a large fire near me), I've
> > simply made a polygon tagged fire=perimeter, a name=* tag and a
> > start_date.  I don't expect rendering, it's meant to be an "up to
> > right about here" (inside the polygon is/was a burning fire,
> > outside was no fire).  I wouldn't say it is more accurate than 20
> > to 50 meters on any edge, an "across a wide street" distance to be
> > "off" is OK with me, considering this fire's size, but if a slight
> > skew jiggles the whole thing into place better, feel free to
> > nudge.  It's the tagging I'm interested in getting right, and
> > perhaps wondering if or even that people enter gigantic fires that
> > will significantly change landscape for some time into OSM, as I
> > have done.  This will affect my local mapping, as a great much has
> > burned.  Even after starting almost two weeks ago, as of 20 minutes
> > ago this fire is 33% contained, with good, steady progress.  These
> > men and women are heroes.
> > > 
> > > To me, this is a significant polygon in my local mapping:  it is
> > a "huge thing" that is a major feature on a map, especially right
> > now.  I firmly believe it belongs in OSM for many reasons and want
> > it tagged "correctly."  Yes, there are other maps that show this, I
> > believe OSM should have these data, too, as this perimeter will
> > affect much (in the real world) and much newer, updated mapping in
> > OSM going forward.
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us