Yeah exactly, I agree with this. An area used for forestry ie. to produce timber, would still have natural=wood if there are trees there.
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 at 11:00, Warin <[email protected]> wrote: > On 18/6/20 6:48 pm, Little Maps wrote: > > Many thanks Warin, that seems much more variable in Vic, esp in Gippsland > where natural=wood is a common tag for areas tagged as State Forests. > Plantations in SW Vic are quite a mix. I wonder if it’s worth adding a > section to the Aus tagging guidelines page to specify a preferred usage for > landuse=forest and natural=wood, and perhaps other vegetation tags? I’d be > happy to draft some text if more seasoned mappers were happy to comment and > edit it. Thanks again Ian > > > Tread here carefully Little Maps! > > > I would like to see the following use: > > natural=wood for areas of trees. Note the key 'natural' applies to both > natural and man altered areas. > > landuse=forest for areas that are maintained by humans to obtain tree produce > e.g. timber. Note these areas usually have trees, but after harvest may have > no trees. > > Note there may be some who disagree with this, see > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Forest. > > I would be interested to here of any Australians who disagree with the above, > and why they disagree. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
