Hi Marc, here is a definition of a UCL. A UCL is Crown land that is not reserved for a purpose or leased but may have previously been used for a purpose such as mining or agriculture and has now returned to the State.

Cheers,
Mark

Hi Marc, UCL stands for Unallocated Crown Land. I will make reference to that in the notes.
Cheers,
Mark

Hi Warin61, thank you for correcting me on my error on the changeset earlier on. In regards to this changeset, can you please clarify your comment "And now it only has one member - not closed" and "nor is it a managed wood"? Regards, MarkLD

Many thanks Warin61 for clarifying the copyright laws concerning the use of external data. In that case I will remove the boundary level for Quillben State Forest and in future ensure that I just use my own field notes, surveys and knowledge of the areas for rendering those areas not captured by aerial photography.

Here is an extract from the printed Atlas pertaining to the 1968 Copyright Act, "a person may not in any form or by any means: adapt, reproduce, store, distribute, in the publication resides with the State of Western Australia. Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research print, display, perform, publish or create derivative works from any part of the publication".
Based on the above statement, I interpret this as a "fair dealing" in using the boundary data for the state forests. What are your thoughts?

Excellent Warin61, I understand. I will change the tag to landuse=managed forest and check on the copyright restriction on the atlas and get back to you (maybe not until Monday). In the meantime I will check out the link you sent me and see if I can make some adjustments to my OsmAnd rendering file. I am using Mapnik as my map style rendering in OsmAnd. Many thanks for your advice and guidance. Cheers, Mark

Hi Warin61,
In answer to your questions 1).Yes, it should be tagged as landuse=managed forest as outlined in the OpenStreetMap decoram, but there is one problem with this, and that there is no distinct map rendering colour to differentiate between manmade plantations and native forests or woods (as termed in Europe). By labelling as landuse=Managed forests, one cannot visually distinguish between the two, therefore I chose natural=woods because of the colour difference that is rendered in a number of mobile apps that use OpenStreetMap data eg. OsmAnd. I am a Forester and I work extensively in these forest areas of the south west of Western Australia, and so I use OsmAnd to locate plant populations and navigate myself around with. There are a number of plantations located within the Quillben/Kinkin state forest areas but if they are rendered with landuse=managed forests they will not be distinguishable on the map apps.
2) My source for changing the boundaries was derived from the State Emergency Service Atlas 2018 edition that is used by multiple state government agencies within Western Australia. The boundaries I employed, were used to distinguish the administrative boundaries of state forests for management purposes in forestry and conservation by both the Forest Products Commission, whom I work for, and the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation & Attractions, both Western Australian state government agencies. These state forest boundaries encompass the trees within it and should be included. If there is an alternative way of rendering this, please let me know.
3) In regards to the broken relation, can you please elaborate and explain the consequences of this action?

I appreciate your feedback and advice on this matter.

Hi Warin61,
I agree that the particular landuse=forest that was tagged produce=wood should be timber as it is a species (Pinus radiata) specifically used for construction, whereas those landuse=forests that are used primarily for paper production (i.e. Eucalyptus globulus) I am still happy to go with wood as the produce tag because this species has poor wood properties for construction and carpentry. Good pick up Warin61. I will have to keep a keen eye on my tagging next time. Cheers.