Bryan,
I would have to agree with your argument. I have some
knowledge of the forestry GIS that is used here in NB and it would be a
daunting task to include cut blocks in the forest. There is more than enough
OSM work in Canada just getting the road network built it would be
counterproductive to spend a lot of time on forest cut blocks.
Bernie.
--
Bernie Connors, P.Eng
Service New Brunswick
(506) 444-2077
45°56'25.21"N, 66°38'53.65"W
www.snb.ca/geonb/<http://www.snb.ca/geonb/>
From: Bryan Crosby [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Saturday, 2011-03-05 01:58
To: 'talk-ca'
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Mapping cut blocks in "wooded" areas
I would tag it as natural=wood as I don’t feel that there is any distinction
between a 2-year old stand and a 250 year old stand in terms of being wood, or
forest. They are merely different ages. Licensees maintain incredibly
accurate and up-to-date maps that indicate the different openings and their
respective stages of development. They have dedicated GIS guys that maintain
these maps as fast as techies bring it in. I suppose, in theory, an OSM tag
could be used to indicate the stage of opening development, but one would
require the date of harvesting, the date of planting and the dates of the
silviculture surveys to accurately assess the phase. Unless you are a forester
you won’t have access to that information and would be guessing. I just feel
that attempting to seriously map out such temporary features accurately goes
way beyond the ability of OSM (at this point, at least).
Bryan
From: Samuel Longiaru [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: March-04-11 9:43 PM
To: talk-ca
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Mapping cut blocks in "wooded" areas
I very much see your point which is why I was asking for some direction. I
guess it comes down to whether the map should reflect what we see at some given
snapshot in time, or whether it is reflecting the overall landuse scheme. In
short, while standing in the middle of a clear-cut, would it be more accurate
that my map show that spot as wooded or not wooded?
Sam L.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Crosby
<[email protected]<mailto:bryan%20crosby%20%[email protected]%3e>>
To: 'talk-ca'
<[email protected]<mailto:'talk-ca'%20%[email protected]%3e>>
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Mapping cut blocks in "wooded" areas
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 21:11:20 -0800
RE: cut-blocks
As someone who has spent done time as a forest technician, I strongly advise
against mapping forestry activity. Cut block spatial data changes daily and
any images used to trace are out of date. There are literally tens of
thousands of clear cuts in British Columbia alone and there is absolutely no
way OSM mappers would be able to keep up with changes. Keep in mind that most
clearcuts on crown land (and in some cases, private land) are temporary
openings in various stages forest development. A 2 year old stand is just as
much a forest as a 25 year old free-to-grow stand or a 250 year old stand of
timber. I believe that mapping a privately held ‘Christmas’ tree farm would be
pertinent, but these are radically different from commercial forestry openings.
I would also advise extreme caution in using images to map forest development
roads unless are working on a high traffic mainline. Many spur roads are in
various stages of deactivation. It may look like a road from the outdated
image, but it may have been completely deactivated and replanted. A site
inspection is the only way to be sure.
Bryan
British Columbia
From: Daniel Begin [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: March-04-11 8:19 PM
To: 'Samuel Longiaru'; 'talk-ca'
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Mapping cut blocks in "wooded" areas
Hi Samuel,
About tagging forested areas, I would use landuse=forest only if it is obvious
on the field that the area is managed/harvested, as for landuse=orchard or
landuse=vineyard. We have a lot of Christmas tree plantations in the area and I
map them as landuse=forest because it is obvious on the imagery and on the
field.
If it is difficult to determine if an area is under timber lease or not,
because it looks the same, I would keep it natural=wood...
About Cut blocks, I would map the hole they create that wooded area. If the
area is replanted, then some OSM contributor will remove the hole you map in
10-20 years from now!
Mapping the reality is the best we can do and because the reality changes over
time, we can keep mapping !-)
Daniel
________________________________
From: Samuel Longiaru [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: March-04-11 21:45
To: talk-ca
Subject: [Talk-ca] Mapping cut blocks in "wooded" areas
Hi Everybody,
I've been importing CanVec mostly south of Kamloops for the past several weeks
and am going to take some time now to go back and bring stuff up to date. One
question I have though is in regards to how to treat cut blocks in the wooded
areas.
I see according to the map features wiki, that the CanVec imported tag of
natural=wood is technically not correct, at least for here, as wood is to be
reserved only for completely reserved/unmanaged areas. I guess most of what I
have should really be mapped as landuse=forest but I have not made the change
because what is under timber lease and what is not would be difficult to
determine. In one sense it's all managed to some degree or other. But my
point is rather what should be done with the cut blocks, which in some areas
constitute up to 50% or more of the forested area. http://osm.org/go/WJ1cj_R
is a typical area. It seems improper to keep them as wooded when they are
clearly not, and yet most are replanted and will be wooded again someday... or
at least that's what they keep telling us.
I started mapping them as it truly gives a more accurate representation of the
current state of affairs on the ground... but thought I'd better get some
guidance before proceeding too far.
Thanks,
Sam L.
Kamloops
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
