Hi, I can’t see this discussed much and not even sure if it would be consumed by tools anyway (but I could do overpass queries)…
As someone who plots routes for groups most days, it’s often useful to know if fields ‘may’ occasionally contain cattle (helps plan diversions if necessary). I realise they move and it’s not a live view.
I can see that we should be able to tag with hazard:animal=livestock (or maybe the specific types) but wondered if anyone else had been doing this or if there’s a concensus for markup please?
It looks like putting hazard=animal_crossing on the paths and also optionally putting the species ones you mentioned would cover this. Apparently there’s only 66 uses of this tag in the UK at the moment.
I wonder if landuse=animal_keeping | animal_keeping=cow would be the way to go - certainly for the field and arguably valid on the footpath that is in the field (though says not to be used there ).
landuse=animal_keeping is a tag I’ve not seen much, but a search shows it’s use in the UK is mostly linked to Horse paddocks.
In the UK fields used for grazing livestock are mapped, or can be mapped, as either
landuse=meadow
meadow=pasture
or
landuse=farmland
farmland=pasture
The presence of livestock could be derived by the =pasture ?
See no problem with adding a tag that adds verifiable info about livestock present, but I’d go for a tag not dependent on the landuse eg
livestock=cattle
I don’t think looking at meadow=pasture or farmland=pasture would be particularly useful as, for large areas of the country, the animals typically being grazed are sheep rather than cows. More specific tagging would probably be useful; or perhaps an overlay map since the data is dynamic.
The hazard=* tag is intended to tag hazards that are explicitly declared by posted signage and/or government declaration. Consistent with OSM conventions, mappers should only tag hazard features that are permanent or recurring, rather than temporary.
So, at least in theory, there’d need to be a sign warning about the animals and the field would need to regularly need to contain them (rather than the footpath just crossing a field which might occasionally have livestock in).
There’s a similar situation in the United States, with trails on Bureau of Land Management rangeland. There hasn’t been any sort of consensus on how to tag these.
(Rangeland is emphatically not “meadow” or “pasture”. It’s large areas of land that are fenced but otherwise unmodified from the natural state.)
I think hazard=animal or hazard:animal=livestock could be useful, especially for routes where cattle are regularly present. The tricky part is that the cattle can move around, so I wouldn’t treat it as a permanent obstruction. If routing apps don’t use the tag yet, an Overpass query might be the most practical way to find these spots for now.
Mostly. The wiki page covers it. They all have to be verifiable, and often that will be by a roadsign (most mapped hazards are things that occur on roads, but not exclusively).
“Cattle in a field” isn’t really a hazard in OSM terms** - in some parts of the UK, they’re in almost every field. If I’m on a footpath through two fields with cows in with a major road in between, crossing the road is the biggest “hazard” and we don’t map it as that. There are subtags for meadow and farmland that might help a bit, and also pasture (though not many uses there). There are 120 uses of animal with landuse=farmland and 600 of animal with landuse=meadow, so that looks like the best option.
** Yes, some people are killed by cows - that article suggests 22 in 4 years (the majority being people actually working with cattle). Compared with road casualties, it is tiny.
As an experienced Rambler I would not consider cattle a tag worthy hazard. Generally give them a wide them a wide berth and don’t get between a cow and its calf. If you need them to move away from a gate or stile just be assertive, they will move.
Most problems occur when you have a dog with you. The linked NFU advice should be followed. Let the dog go if you feel threatened.
Yeah, this is more about whether there is a compliant way to mark up footpaths which ‘may’ cross with livestock (esp. cattle), especially given the non-permanent nature. Not a biggy if there isn’t, but felt feasible for there to be one.
The cattle risk side is personal interpretation - I don’t have an issue when alone, but led groups have different dynamics including for anyone pregnant (I recce routes so I can pre-plan dynamic variations).
The other use-case is when teaching people how to plan routes in the area themselves, I thought it might be helpful to have a mechanism to highlight livestock potential. The goal is to look at customising a route planner (such as BRouter) based on a spectrum of needs rather than typical shortest / off-road / most used options.
I have a wealth of other local route planning knowledge which I use constantly, but not suitable for OSM (seasonal/weather related overgrowth/mud, soulful ambience quality, visible historical elements, night-time safety and so on). Therefore considering options, even just simple suites of GPX segments to display and maybe write a route scorer based on matches (I wrote a similar PoC based on Strava activities).
Just to throw this in the mix, I’m in currently in discussion with user @ianc about what I view as subjective / advisory hazards and how (or whether) to incorporate them in the map:
This is substantially the same query in principle (though not involving the cows)
I would note that in my case even in ideal conditions it is dangerous, so is permanent. Cattle are a bit different. I’ve walked past the most beady-eyed bull with nothing but clenched buttocks, but beat a hasty retreat when a cow thought I was bothering it’s little’un - but 9 times out of 10 the field is empty, or the cows too far away to be an issue.
Spot on observation, if you insist, they will give in. Most of the time, so to say. But do not dare to … (if you cling to you live.)
In my local area, signs can be found warning of said danger. But they are not backed by some administrative power, so no hazard mappable there @Mateusz_Konieczny ?
I’d map hazard=livestock (short and sweet) it the tagging police allows? BTW: There are also “hazard=Livestock Guardian Dogs” signs present here One more missing tag?
).
One more missing tag?