Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

sent from a phone > Il giorno 27 ott 2016, alle ore 01:26, Dave Swarthout > ha scritto: > > I agree with Kevin when he says "In any case, I think we both agree that > hunting regulations are complex and varied enough that the specific details > almost certainly don't belong in OSM, particul

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

This is an interesting thread and although I've not done much tagging of protected areas, there are millions of acres of such areas in Alaska, most of which do not yet have the level of comprehensive tagging being discussed here. I came across this article from a major Alaskan newspaper and while i

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

So, Germany has hunting regulations even more complex and restrictive than those in the US (which are already complex). But in both countries, hunting is largely practiced as an aid to conservation - thinning the herd, which would otherwise undergo horribly destructive boom-and-bust cycles for want

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

sent from a phone > Il giorno 26 ott 2016, alle ore 19:39, Kevin Kenny > ha scritto: > > In my part of the world, game animals are abundant enough, and public forest > lands are also abundant enough, that most hunters either hunt on their own > property or that of a club, or simply hunt on

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

Forgive me if this is a duplicate. I was typing from my phone, and used the wrong 'From:' address, causing the message to drop into the moderator queue. We don't generally try to encode all the details of local law. I'm perfectly happy with saying that licensing, seasons, hours, permissible speci

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

I wonder whether a simple hunting=yes is sufficient. In Belgium you can only hunt for a limited period of the year and even within that period there are sub-periods for different animals. Hunting in Flanders is often on fields and meadows, but you have to stay at least 150m (AFAIK) away from the ho

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > if the forest and the hunting area are known under different names, under > which tag would you put which name? Two points for the whole discussion thread: 1) Forest areas (with the tag, that is) can be subdivided for various attributes, like deciduous/coniferous/las

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

2016-10-24 23:48 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > Use the same method as for bridges .. > > the 'primary' feature name > > name=* > > the 'other' feature > > hunting:name=* > > forest:name=* > > These details are trivial. I do indeed propose the same method as for bridges, where I h

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Yves wrote: > Puting aside the pleasure to debate over landuse and landcover, what about > defining hunting = as a permission tag, and invent a new polygon type > dedicated to define a hunting area boundary where no other polygon is > suitable to add this tag to?

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On 25-Oct-16 03:57 AM, Yves wrote: Puting aside the pleasure to debate over landuse and landcover, what about defining hunting = as a permission tag, and invent a new polygon type dedicated to define a hunting area boundary where no other polygon is suitable to add this tag to? Yves Nice ide

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On 25-Oct-16 12:20 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Il giorno 24 ott 2016, alle ore 13:29, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha scritto: I would use the following combination; landuse=hunting landcover=trees natural=wood (I too don't 'like' this and for that reason I tend to dual

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

Puting aside the pleasure to debate over landuse and landcover, what about defining hunting = as a permission tag, and invent a new polygon type dedicated to define a hunting area boundary where no other polygon is suitable to add this tag to? Yves Le 24 octobre 2016 13:29:21 GMT+02:00, War

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On 24/10/16 09:54, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2016-10-23 11:48 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com >: And reiterate your words " in case of a dedicated area" and mine "For an area dedicated to the hunting of game then landuse=hunting" .. I think th

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

sent from a phone > Il giorno 24 ott 2016, alle ore 13:29, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha > scritto: > I would use the following combination; > > landuse=hunting > landcover=trees > natural=wood (I too don't 'like' this and for that reason I tend to dual tag > with the landcover=trees tag.

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On 24-Oct-16 07:54 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2016-10-23 11:48 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com >: And reiterate your words " in case of a dedicated area" and mine "For an area dedicated to the hunting of game then landuse=hunting" .. I thin

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

2016-10-23 11:48 GMT+02:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > And reiterate your words " in case of a dedicated area" and > mine "For an area dedicated to the hunting of game then landuse=hunting" .. > I think that is fairly clear ... dedicated, primary use is hunting. > > Most 'landuse' have more t

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On 23-Oct-16 05:32 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Il giorno 22 ott 2016, alle ore 11:57, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha scritto: For an area dedicated to the hunting of game then landuse=hunting would be better than using amenity. It is a use of the land. And any use of t

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

sent from a phone > Il giorno 22 ott 2016, alle ore 11:57, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> ha > scritto: > > For an area dedicated to the hunting of game then landuse=hunting would be > better than using amenity. > It is a use of the land. And any use of the land is an amenity to someone, so >

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On 22-Oct-16 08:07 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: While it is true that hunting might be allowed or not in nature reserves, and that according to the situation it might be necessary or beneficial for the nature if some hunting with the aim of population control is done, leisure=nature_reserve s

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

While it is true that hunting might be allowed or not in nature reserves, and that according to the situation it might be necessary or beneficial for the nature if some hunting with the aim of population control is done, leisure=nature_reserve still is not the answer to the question how to tag a hu

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

I definitely think it's a matter of permission and opening hours, the polygon where this permission apply is secondary, could it be an admin boundary or reserve of some kind. Let the case where no boundary exists yet in OSM, then map it. Yves Le 21 octobre 2016 15:45:26 GMT+02:00, Kevin Ke

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Craig Wallace wrote: > > > But that is different from an area is managed primarily to benefit > hunting. eg if they are keeping deer numbers artificially high (feeding > over winter, or breeding), just to allow as many as possible to be shot. > Despite the damage t

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

That's rather a simplistic view. Hunting reserves exist to protect the land from development so that there will be places where it is possible to hunt and game available to harvest. The important distinction isn't the one between 'hunting reserve' and 'wilderness'; it's the one between 'reserve la

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On 2016-10-21 14:07, Greg Troxel wrote: Craig Wallace writes: I think this is wrong. A nature reserve an area to protect wildlife, not to allow it to be shot. A nature reserve is managed for the purposes of conservation. So if an area is primarily for hunting, it is not a nature reserve. I

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

Craig Wallace writes: > I think this is wrong. A nature reserve an area to protect wildlife, > not to allow it to be shot. A nature reserve is managed for the > purposes of conservation. So if an area is primarily for hunting, it > is not a nature reserve. I think you are off here. Nature is c

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

On 2016-10-20 16:33, Kevin Kenny wrote: Since nobody else has stepped forward to answer this, as far as I can tell, let me take a whack at it: I think that the best tagging for a hunting reserve that the current renderer knows about is 'leisure=nature_reserve". That's how the state wildlife mana

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

@Kevin, Your reply is, as always, well thought out and well stated. I haven't had the opportunity to tag any of these so far but I've stashed a copy of this thread in my Evernotes folder. Keep up the good work! On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Kevin Kenny wrote: > Since nobody else has steppe

[Tagging] Hunting area tagging

Hunting areas rights and laws are of GREAT variety in the world, even within a particular country. I don't see no problem in tagging them, but I guess the mapping schem should let a lot of room, not only for refinement, but also for completely different definition. Maybe starting with hunt

Re: [Tagging] Hunting area tagging

Since nobody else has stepped forward to answer this, as far as I can tell, let me take a whack at it: I think that the best tagging for a hunting reserve that the current renderer knows about is 'leisure=nature_reserve". That's how the state wildlife management areas in New York, the State Game L

[Tagging] Hunting area tagging

Hi everybody! Is there a tag for hunting areas? I mean, big areas, sometimes fenced and usually you have to pay to hunt there. Kind regards, Alejandro Suárez ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/t