Is natural=scrub suitable also if there are almost no trees or bushes but predominating grass and dry branches? What about natural=heath or others? Or even without additional tag? Please see the attached pictures. --*Martin* (talk) 21:35, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- It seems a logical approach to use natural=heath combined with man_made=clearcut in terms of size of plants but maybe not for the type of plants, it may confuse botanists? I admit I've been using it already and i came here to check if there is any discussion. I'm no woodman but i think it would be useful to have an earlier step because apparently some trees take a long time to become a shrub and then a noticeable tree.
- I take the occasion to say that in my opinion natural=scrub should have never been set to be used for clear cuts. It conflicts with the fundamental purpose of the natural=* key, meaning: elements with minimal human intervention, left to a natural ecosystem... I would prefer to use landuse=forest combined with man_made=clearcut because in essence if trees are still planted, it's still a forest. The rendering would have made it look different. ALso, it would make the mapping easier.
- - SHARCRASH (talk) 11:40, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
- For me .. a clear cut exists for some period of time. Then either the area regrows naturally,is planted out or adapted for some other purpose - like a new town. So man_made=clearcut .. well it is a form of land cover, and it should only be there for a short period of time. then it evolves in to something else like landcover=shrub (natural=shrub). I don't think dual tagging is appropriate, it is tagging for the render. Warin61 (talk) 23:16, 25 July 2018 (UTC)