Another part of the question is how many trees before it can be classified as 
such?

I have been to the Grampians within the last 12 months and I did not find any 
scorched area left. All trees had growth.

If I look at the satellite picture from the OSM id editor, large areas look 
burnt. Look around Lake Wartook. All this area is definitely not burnt now and 
I think should classify as covered in trees. Other satellite images show this 
area better.

I would agree that ‘natural’ areas should be separated from ‘boundary’ layers.

 

From: Adam Horan <[email protected]> 
Sent: Friday, 8 October 2021 12:59 PM
To: EON4wd <[email protected]>
Cc: OpenStreetMap-AU Mailing List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Mapping tree cover

 

There is another aspect to your question, which is how to map woods/trees after 
a fire?

 

You're right it looks like someone has mapped the wooded areas as a relation 
with holes for non-wooded areas

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9300964/history

 

Some of the current gaps might be due to recent fires, and I don't know if they 
should be mapped as something else. Depending on the fire severity then it's 
possible the woodland will regrow quickly, slowly, or not for a long time. I 
assume there's some precedent & convention based on the large fires in the east 
a couple of years back.

 

Adam

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Fri, 8 Oct 2021 at 11:33, Adam Horan <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

I think you're asking the same question as Andrew, but you possibly have 
different viewpoints or opinions on it.

 

I see the map as a painting that's becoming more detailed and accurate as time 
progresses. In the beginning the map was blank, and people added large areas of 
landcover just to get something down. Mappers took conveniences like marking a 
national park as all desert or all trees.

 

However now that all the basics have been done mappers are adding more 
detailed, accurate information and using more sophisticated tagging schemes.

 

I think it's entirely right that we map what's on the ground. If there's a 20m 
gap in the trees for a road, or significant fire break, or there's been 
clearing, then people should map that in detail if they have time and 
inclination.

 

Also the trees tend not to respect administrative boundaries, it's almost like 
they don't know they're there... Tree cover extends beyond the National Parks 
in a continuous run, and similarly there are clearings, lakes, meadows, 
moorlands within the parks.

 

However the first step in mapping this detail is to remove the blanket 
landcover from the admin boundary.

 

Adam

 

 

On Fri, 8 Oct 2021 at 09:22, EON4wd <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

Hi,

Further to Andrew Parkers question about forested areas.

I am also a casual user for uploading data and I also create my own maps from 
the data.

My interest is in 4wd tracks.

The Grampians has had the ‘landcover – tree’ ‘areas’ changed which in my 
opinion is now not correct.

See

https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=16/-37.1268/142.3867

The Grampians is a National park and is covered in trees.

There are a number of rocks and rocky outcrops (lots actually) and a few lakes 
and roads plus some swamp and rock quarries, but generally speaking it is 
completely covered in trees, everywhere, including the rocky outcrops.

I suspect that some well meaning person has mapped what they could see via a 
satellite image after a fire went though.

Question, How can I identify this person so that I can contact them to be able 
to find out what they are thinking?

Traditionally, the whole area is mapped as tree cover and then other features 
are added on top, such as the lakes and roads.

Also towards the SA border there are other treed areas that have been very 
carefully traced out. Yet traditionally the whole area is set with the fence 
lines and tracks then marked on top.

Not necessarily wrong, but tracing the exact line of where the trees finish and 
the road side has been cleared, is not really helpful. Or is it?

 

Thanks

Ian Winter

 

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

Reply via email to