Is this supposed to be used for grass in the mountain but not fields where farmes collect grass ? Sletuffe 16:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
distinct from a proposed natural=tundra? tundra would be less vegetated, just lichen, mosses, and other hardy alpine turfs. --Hamish 08:03, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
- I think it is the same as mountainous tundra, that is mountains above the tree-line. Tundra is all cold areas with vegetation as you describe, fell is an english (brittish) word for high ground with tundra-like nature. As I understand from wikipedia, the word comes from Scandinavia that have mountains called fjäll, they are gently sloping and have large areas above the tree-limit in three zones (low-alpine, medium-alpine, high-alpine), the highest zone, the high-alpine have the vegetation you describe. I guess the high pastures of Switzerland and Austria also is fell.
- I wonde rif the high-alpine regions of bare rock is supposed to be mapped by fell too?/Johan Jönsson 17:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Description vs wikipedia
The description "Bare upper lying uncultivated land on high ground, principally covered with grass and often grazed." don't match the definition in wikipedia: "High and barren landscape feature, such as a mountain range or moor-covered hills."
In Wikipedia a fell is a landscape feature not a vegetation feature. Also it is limited to Scandinavia, the Isle of Man, parts of northern England, and Scotland.
- Problem is : if you change now the definition of a tag, all 7000 current use will loose their past meaning. Either a mass retag i needed, or create a new tag for "true fell" as defined in wikipedia. sletuffe (talk) 14:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)