This is available in the London's datastore under open government license according to the FAQ.
And no the data is not imported to OSM at this date. But the doc for natural=tree tag in OSM does have quite a lot of possible extra types, leaf_type and cycle are the most common.
Each local council will have a database of all street and park trees on their land. At some regular interval they need to inspect each tree to ensure it isn't rotten or otherwise dangerous.
Often it's license incompatibilities. Even open geodata is often licensed in a way incompatible with OSM. E.g. a typical attribution requirement would require OSM data consumers to include the full list of data sources in the attribution (which is usually just mentioning the OSM contributors). So often there are individual arrangements with the respective bureaus to give the data to OSM under different conditions. For example, the cadastre data here in a southern German state is available under the condition that the attribution happens in the OSM changeset, which is much easier to fulfill (and is being done automatically in editors as soon as you have that imagery as a background layer).
But generally, someone must care enough to ask the data holders to make such an import possible. And I guess for individual trees the interest isn't as high as for roads or building footprints.
Apart from the excellent sibling post, the view is that data imports are hard to handle. The question of updating imported data is tricky. Most organisations who have map data think their data is the best, many times the OSM data is better than gov data in specific cases so should you overwritenthe better data just to get a complete map?
It is a tricky subject that OSM handles by not importing as much as Google.
Comments
This is available in the London's datastore under open government license according to the FAQ.
And no the data is not imported to OSM at this date. But the doc for natural=tree tag in OSM does have quite a lot of possible extra types, leaf_type and cycle are the most common.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=tree
Each local council will have a database of all street and park trees on their land. At some regular interval they need to inspect each tree to ensure it isn't rotten or otherwise dangerous.
Any idea why the data doesn't get imported into OSM? Seems like local governments worldwide should be doing this.
Often it's license incompatibilities. Even open geodata is often licensed in a way incompatible with OSM. E.g. a typical attribution requirement would require OSM data consumers to include the full list of data sources in the attribution (which is usually just mentioning the OSM contributors). So often there are individual arrangements with the respective bureaus to give the data to OSM under different conditions. For example, the cadastre data here in a southern German state is available under the condition that the attribution happens in the OSM changeset, which is much easier to fulfill (and is being done automatically in editors as soon as you have that imagery as a background layer).
But generally, someone must care enough to ask the data holders to make such an import possible. And I guess for individual trees the interest isn't as high as for roads or building footprints.
Apart from the excellent sibling post, the view is that data imports are hard to handle. The question of updating imported data is tricky. Most organisations who have map data think their data is the best, many times the OSM data is better than gov data in specific cases so should you overwritenthe better data just to get a complete map?
It is a tricky subject that OSM handles by not importing as much as Google.