For bird watchers there are many sites where one can find interesting locations to go birdwatching. Not all are qualified for OSM since there is no physical attribute visible on the ground. Many are though because there is a hut, wall, shelter etc. (leisure=bird_hide) But there are also birding locations without structures. For example some hills, platforms, parking places are specifically created to facilitate birdwatching. Often with information about what birds can be expected (information=board) and/or with public telescopes/binoculars.
Of course we can map all these separate objects but it would be handy to have a general tag so that one does not have to query all these separate tags to find bird watching places.
Just to be clear .. I am not looking for a way to tag this when there is no physical attribute present that suggests this place is for bird watching.
Is there a key for this and if not what would be the best way to achieve this in OSM?
The combination tourism=viewpoint + birdwatching=yes could work.
The key birdwatching is not a widely used (only 4 matches on Taginfo), but it seems clear that the intention behind using it is to indicate that the feature is related to birdwatching.
Imo the suggestion is to use a more generic approach instead of the specific birdwatching=yes or viewpoint=birdwatching. There may be similar viewpoints where one can watch animals different from birds. Possible tagging
tourism=viewpoint
viewpoint=animal
animal=bird
I think you will not find many places where you can watch animals other than birds or cattle/sheep at least in Europe (except a zoo or animal park which is a different story) but in other regions like Africa there surely are. Considering this a generic approach would make sense. My own suggestion
I donât think special bird watching related objects are necessary to map such a spot. Maybe there is only a grassy patch with a bench but locally well known to be a good bird watching spot, why not map it as such?
Thanks for this suggestion . It was more or less what I had in mind after reading @Kovoschiz post. I find this both logic but also a bit overdone if you are suggesting to add these tags also to currently mapped leisure=bird_hide. I am not sure if that is what you are suggesting but I was looking for a general tag for bird watching places.
tourism=viewpoint
viewpoint=animalwatching (or animal_watching)
animal=bird
leisure=bird_hide
This might seem a bit overdone since (I think) most people would find leisure=bird_hide enough. But then it woud mean that there is no general tag for bird watching places. Maybe that is the conclusion after all. And then I would have to search for both:
tourism=viewpoint
viewpoint=animalwatching (or animal_watching)
animal=bird
and also
leisure=bird_hide
I do not think these places should be mapped as such. That is because it is not verifable .
We have a foot/cycle bridge here, in wood, that has a board every 3-4 meters in the center area, with a picture of a bird, name of, and description of the bird. Never thought of tagging that. Mostly migrating birds.
leisure=bird_hide makes sense if there is some sort of hide, but not if there isnât. This is a patch of gravel thatâs constructed to allow people to view waterfowl. Thereâs a fence to keep people in, but no hide as such.
Taginfo doesnât suggest obvious subtagging - neither a search of likely keys nor of likely values. Thereâs low enough usage that âjust making something upâ wouldnât be a problem. The only listed projects seem to be going for =yes.
I fully agree and this is not what I am suggesting. I was (and still am) looking for a general tag to identify places dedicated for bird watching. There is already a tag (leisure=bird_hide) which is clear but this only applies if there is a structure (hide) present so what about other places like this parking area with a info sign with birds on it. The parking area was created specifically for cars of bird enthousiast. IMHO this is also a place we should tag. The question is HOW?
then that leaves the question what to do with the current leisure=bird_hide (where there is a structure present I asume) . If we leave it as is then one has to make a complex query to retrieve all bird_watching places.If not then we could add these 3 tags to all places that are currently mapped as leisure=bird_hide which seems a bit overdone to me.
âhaving to run two queriesâ is not that complex. In any situation where OSMâs classification doesnât exactly match the one you want to map youâll have to do that sort of thing anyway.
I agree but stillâŠI am just looking for the easiest way to get things done. Call me lazy Maybe a tag like leisure=birdwatching would have solved this but with the current OSM tagging this seems to be a bit far fetched.
I got your point and I agree it would be nice to have a tag covering all kinds of bird watching places. If we would start from the scratch Iâd say leisure=birdwatching would be fine for all, and add hide=yes in case there is a hide at this place.
But we have already gone the other way, establishing leisure=bird_hide (and also leisure=wildlife_hide as well). Establishing leisure=birdwatching now for those places without hide would create confusion.
So either you start a proposal to change tagging generally to leisure=birdwatching + hide=yes/no and deprecate leisure=bird_hide (and do the same for wildlife watching), or you have to go for another approach as described above.
I agree that it is not a very elegant solution to assign bird watching places to âleisureâ if there is a hide and to âtourismâ if there is none, but at the moment I do not have any better idea âŠ
And if the viewpoint is also for some other kind of activity one can always add that activity.
viewpoint=birdwatching;someotheractivity.
If these 2 tags are added to current leisure=bird_hide then a simple query like viewpoint~âbirdwatchingâ would do the trick to find all places for birdwatching.
Iâve tagged a few points like this as a test. Some have a hide but others donât.
Maybe a tag like leisure=birdwatching would have solved this but with the current OSM tagging this seems to be a bit far fetched.