On 05/10/2016 01:28 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:
What muddied the waters is whether or not this should apply to a US National Forest. I believe it is NOW widely accepted that we should not do that on a USFS administrative boundary (instead using boundary=protected_area, protect_class=6).
I recently removed "landuse=forest" from the boundary of George Washington National Forest specifically because it's not all forest/woods. There are many residential areas and other land use inside the protected area. I hope to go back and actually map the forest area within that boundary. So, yes, I believe it's not appropriate to use landuse=forestry for national forests *unless* the entire encapsulated area is, in fact, forest.
--Eric _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
