Proposal:Key:foraging
| Key:foraging | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Approved (active) |
| Proposed by: | Jdcarls2 |
| Tagging: | foraging=* |
| Applies to: |  ,  ,  , 
|
| Definition: | Whether or not foraging plants / fruit / fungi etc. is permissible for a given location or plant. |
| Statistics: |
|
| Draft started: | 2021-07-29 |
| RFC start: | 2021-07-29 |
| Vote start: | 2021-09-27 |
| Vote end: | 2021-10-20 |
.svg){kind=icon}
Proposal
I am proposing the creation of the key foraging to function similarly existing keys like fishing=* and hunting=*.
Rationale
Foraging typically involves harvesting materials from a plant or fungus, especially edible ones, particularly when such plants/fungi were not planted/cultivated with that end use in mind. While often focused on "wild" plants, foraging can also involve cultivated plants, such as decorative shrubs and trees in landscaping which produce edible/useful parts.
There are also certain types of animals that are "foraged", such as clams, mussels, and snails. The act of harvesting such animals has much more in common with plant harvesting (digging, cutting, picking) than either hunting or fishing.
For individuals who engage in the activity, knowing whether foraging is explicitly allowed or prohibited is important. Often, the restriction on foraging is different from other access types. A park or protected area may be open to the general public, as well as to activities like hunting, but explicitly prohibit taking plants and fungi. Having a specific tag for this would be ideal.
Tagging
As stated, this would function similarly to other established access keys.
Tagging for foraging, especially when prohibited, would apply to an area, as opposed to every individual plant feature therein. This is useful in the case of mushrooms and small annuals, which may not be be as easily mapped as persistent features. Annual plants' abundance and distribution can vary year to year more widely than a long-lived perennial tree/shrub. Mushrooms are simply the fruiting bodies of a larger organism which, while persistent, is difficult to identify.
However, individual plants may not reside within an established area (ex: asparagus growing on the side of a public roadway), but have well-defined, persistent locations. In such cases, the plant itself can also be tagged.
| tag | Foraging is... |
|---|---|
| yes | explicitly allowed |
| no | explicitly prohibited |
| permissive | allowed by owner/operator, but access may be revoked |
| permit | permit is required |
| private | prohibited for the general public |
Examples
Tagging an Area: Forest Preserve with posted "no harvesting/foraging" signs
name=Bristol Woodsleisure=nature_reserveforaging=no
Tagging a Node: Decorative shrub in front of public building
taxon=Amelanchier canadensisoperator=Plano Community Librarynatural=shrubforaging=permissive
Tagging a Node: Asparagus on the side of the road, within the public roadway
taxon=Asparagus officinalisnatural=plantforaging=yes
This example assumes that the right-of-way itself does not have an access restriction on pedestrians.
More Complex Tagging for Specific Restrictions
In some places, foraging access differs on the basis of what is being foraged. For example, protected areas may prohibit the harvesting of fungi or ginseng, but allow other types of foraging. Two ideas have been suggested by other users to address this:
- Namespacing.
foraging=yes+foraging:mushrooms=no+foraging:ginseng=no - Conditional Restrictions.
foraging=yes+foraging:conditional=no @ (mushrooms, ginseng)
Very little discussion has taken place on this topic, however, and it is unclear which is preferable at this point. As the author of this proposal, I personally favor the conditional restrictions tagging, as this would prevent the proliferation of keys. No such foraging restrictions are currently mapped either way.
Features/Pages affected
The page Tagging for Foraging was created to provide guidance for tagging that can facilitate foraging. The page is still a work in progress, and its contents depend upon the success of this proposal.
If approved, it would also be worth mentioning the tag on Tag:boundary=protected area, Tag:leisure=nature reserve, and the natural = tree / shrub / plant pages. Existing features can have this tag added to them where such information is known, but no features will have this tag automatically applied to them.
Examples of Foraging Maps (Non-OSM)
External discussions
Discussion threads on the topic can also be found on OSMUS Slack and OSM World Discord.
- Initial email to tagging list: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2021-July/062131.html
Comments
Please comment on the discussion page.
Voting
I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. Though this proposal would be a welcomed refinement, it does not explicitly state how to map the foraging of different products. If you did not receive review on this part, you may simply choose on your own one way to map it, and let the contributors accept or reject it; explicitly leaving this tagging to the choice of the mapper will probably lead to tag fragmentation. --Penegal (talk) 04:39, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments! Yes, that is one of the thornier parts of this, and one which regrettably received almost no input from other users during the RFC period. Obviously not going to edit the details during voting, but I'll probably just pick a method and go without once voting ends, regardless of the outcome. --Jdcarls2 (talk) 13:43, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. --Riiga (talk) 18:25, 28 September 2021 (UTC)- I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. I noticed one issue "access=permit" - 'permit is required'. It should be 'permit is required and always or nearly always granted' (if something requires hard to get permit then it is access=private) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:26, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
- Good point. I was thinking specifically of US Forest Service areas on that point, where permits are easily obtained. Once voting ends, I will amend that section as you suggest.
- I approve this proposal. cautiously approving - I see not problems in tagging scheme. The tricky part is that in many cases foraging is done, accepted, noone has problem but is technically illegal --Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 14:49, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
- I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. I agree with Penegal, the suggested tag and its uses seem fine, but the proposal needs some refinement before voting. It's fine to halt the voting and restart after the edits have been made IMO. --Mueschel (talk) 17:14, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --EneaSuper (talk) 09:46, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --MinerMax555 (talk) 09:58, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Zorae (talk) 05:33, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal.—Dieterdreist (talk) 06:02, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --快乐的老鼠宝宝 (talk) 08:17, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. With the caveat that there are other restrictions to take into account: The baseline situation in the UK (NB some terminology/copyediting errors in the article, but it's still a useful summary) is complicated - *non-commercial* foraging is allowed along rights of way, but not on access land under the CRoW act for England and Wales - the situation is different in Scotland . Byelaws aren't the only restriction, but even they can be hard to pin down. One point of interest is that foraging that includes removal of plants may be different to removal of merely fruit; fungi in Scotland get a special mention. -- ChrisHodgesUK (talk) 08:54, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Mundilfari (talk) 15:52, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. —-SherbetS (talk) 18:41, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. I've been wondering for a long time why I can't find a way to tag apple trees and the like in my city that people are allowed to eat from. This seems like an obvious thing for the sharing community of OSM to care about and support, so I vote yes. Thank you! --SLF Børge A Roum (talk) 20:56, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
Voting on this proposal has been closed.
It was approved with 11 votes for, 0 votes against and 3 abstentions.