I have an emphasis on mapping forest roads and tracks, also those which are in a certain stage of decay but still passable. One of the major issues is that many of the minor tracks are covered by deadwood of different kind, from small twigs to broken logs of some 20 cm diameter.
Part of these deadwood are remains of logging works, part is just natural stuff like branches broken down and the like.
In Germany we have to terms for such wood:
“Reiser” or “Reisig” describes man made remains of logging works up to a diameter of 7 cm max. The english equivalent should be “lop” or “lopwood”.
No special term known for those pieses measuring > 7 cm.
“Totholz” describes natural stuff like broken branches or fallen trees. The english translation would be “deadwood”.
I have started to tag such tracks with obstacle=deadwood as a generic term but would like to confirm if this is correct or if “lop” or “lopwood” would probably be more precise?
Never heard that in British English - not saying it isn’t used somewhere, but I live in an area where small and large forestry operation is fairly common.
“lop” is a verb - if you cut side branches off a tree, thin it out or similar, then that is what you might be doing (especially if you cut through in one stroke as opposed to sawing). The resulting branches would normally be just described as “wood”.
If a tree is cut down or falls on a path, it might be called a “dead tree”.
“deadwood” can mean any dead wood, including in a still upright tree.
Note that fallen_tree is a commonly used obstacle value.
Thanks for your comment - I was quite sure I’d see a reply from you to this question … … I collected “lop” and “lopwood” from various sources:
(see line 3 "lop → das Reisig)
also on the wiki page for man_made=clearcut:
cutline=loggingmachine - logging machine tracks that are impassable due to lopwood
but I have to admit that I have not heard that before as well.
so this could well be used for the different kinds of dead wood in my sample pics I understand.
Yes, I am using that regulary as value for obstacle, together with “vegetation” and “deadwood”. Although if there are lots of them crisscrossing a track (trees of minor dimension like diameter 10 - 20 cm) I am not tagging them as nodes but directly to the way with obstacle=fallen_trees.
I am a near-native speaker of Canadian English with what I would consider a mainstream familiarity with logging operations (lumberjacks, timber rafts, logging roads, etc) and I fully concur with your message.
I can imagine how “lop” would become a noun for objects that were lopped off of something, but it’s very far from common usage.
I would describe the images in the first post as:
fallen branches, and a fallen tree in the background down the slope
fallen trees
fallen branches
lots of fallen branches
cut tree (because I can see the cut edge, and the short length), and fallen branches
“Deadwood” doesn’t seem wrong for any of these, either.
To me the varying levels of passability seem more relevant than what we call the obstacle.
I agree with that and use “obstacle” just as an additional information to the major track tags grade, surface and smoothness. Nevertheless I think it is helpful to call the wood scattered over these tracks by a correct and commonly understood name.
So far I understand that “deadwood” fits this purpose which is fine as I already started using that .
… I collected “lop” and “lopwood” from various sources: