[OSM-talk] Woods vs Forests

[Warin]

On 27-Oct-17 04:51 PM, Oleksiy Muzalyev wrote:
> On 27.10.17 00:49, Dave F wrote:
>> [...]
>> I think you'd be hard pressed to find any area of trees which hasn't 
>> been managed in one way or another by humans; especially in the 
>> Western world. [...]
>
> There is a theory nowadays that woods should be left alone to natural 
> cycles which may last hundreds of years. At least that a forest is not 
> a park where everything should be cleaned up and tidy. Dead wood in a 
> forest is the food for numerous insects. These insects are the basis 
> of a biodiversity pyramid. Here is some information on it: 
> http://blogs.helsinki.fi/deadwoodmeeting/files/2016/02/Barbalat_dead-wood-insects_web.pdf
>
> Best regards,
>
> O.

For thousands of years the Australian Aborigines have used fire to 
manage their lands.
There is a view that current fire dangers in Australia are a result of 
the lack of regular fire burning practices.
There is also the view that these burning practices encourage native 
vegetation.
And yet another view that these burning practices would discourage 
introduced weeds.
There are many who want regular patterned fire burns conducted for the 
above reasons.

Having said that, there are at several areas that have not been managed 
by humans by fire for many, if not thousands of, years - one where the 
Wollemi Pine was found and a few where cycads remain in central and 
northern Australia.

------------------
My view;

The landuse key is clearly to tag the use of the land by humans.

The natural key is unclear - it seams to be for both things made by 
nature and things made by man! To me this confused all and the key 
should be discouraged.
It should be replaced by the keys landcover and landform, these have no 
implication of human or nature but simply describe the type of feature.