Tagging a woodland that is partially clear cut?

Help and support
1

I have been trying to clean up a large woodland on OSM. Previously, the various chunks of clearcut or managed or natural woodland or scrub (etc) were tagged individually as name=X Wood. This didn’t feel like a good representation of the forest for certain 3rd party data uses (and rendered with the name in several places which was ugly).

I thought I’d found a solution, and removed all the names, creating a new relation of a managed forest with the name “X Forest”. The I realised on some routing-apps this renders as one large forest at one zoom-level but the clearcut etc are visible when you zoom in. This might not only be more unclear but might create even worse data generally (eg, if somebody’s trying to work out how many sq mi of forest the area has, would their scraping count X Wood’s acreage twice?

Aditionally, this leads to a scenario where there is a relation (of a managed forest with no name) within a relation (or a managed forest called X Wood). That’s probably not ideal either.

In short, is there a better way to deal with this scenario? Should I revert to how it was or leave it how I’ve made it?

2

It’s probably worth linking to the OSM features you’re asking about.

3 Likes
3

I’d suggest something like I’ve done in a simple example here - boundary=forest for the forest area. The remaining trees are mapped as natural=wood, the cleared area as whatever is appropriate - I’ve gone for natural=scrub, since that’s mostly what’s there.

4

There’s man_made=clearcut man_made=clearcut | Tags | OpenStreetMap Taginfo with 72K use. See wiki Tag:man_made=clearcut - OpenStreetMap Wiki suggesting to add to such an outline tags like landuse=* or natural=* to represent the present state/use of that area.