Hi the gazetted State Forest boundaries are not rendered currently on the default map on the OpenStreetMap (OpenStreetMap Carto). landuse=forest is considered as forestry use and natural=wood are natural wooded areas not subject to forestry but both are rendered the same.
When the State Forest is mapped in isolation the boundary of the landuse=forest defines the area but as soon as an area of trees is mapped extending beyond the State Forest boundary, as is expected, then the State Forest boundary is not depicted. Tag:boundary=protected_area https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dprotected_area <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary=protected_area> After looking at the options listed on wiki link above, along with the Nature-protected-areas like national parks (and all the other CAPAD types <http://www.environment.gov.au/land/nrs/science/capad/abbreviations> ), I feel that boundary=protected_area is reasonable tag for the gazetted State Forest boundaries with further classification as Resources-protected-areas. I feel the the State Forests are boundaries where tree resources are protected or reserved for future forestry operations and need to be defined by their boundaries on the osm. There are strict rules covering these areas and we should be readily able to see them on the map. State Reserve and Timber Reserve in CAPAD don’t capture the State Forests. On the Resources-protected-areas <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary=protected_area#Resources-protected-areas> for particular countries I note that the United States has listed State Forest under protect_class 15, this being described at the Resources-protected-area section as … 15 location condition: floodwater retention area, protection forest, grazing land, … I propose that we also add ’State Forest’ to protect_class 15 on the Resources-protected-area table. With the most recent changes toOpenStreetMap Carto this would enable rendering of the State Forest boundaries in the same manner as all the other protected area boundaries. Another partial solution would be to render landuse=forest differently than the landcover tags but that is unlikely from my reading of the tagging and rendering groups and if two separately gazetted forestry boundaries shared a border the boundary between the two would not be depicted on the map anyway. Nevw
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
