<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"></div></div></div></div></div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 01:18, Tod Fitch <<a href="mailto:tod@fitchfamily.org">tod@fitchfamily.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
<br>
> On May 30, 2020, at 7:57 AM, Rob Savoye <<a href="mailto:rob@senecass.com" target="_blank">rob@senecass.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
>> Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 15:46:31 +0200<br>
>> From: Daniel Westergren <<a href="mailto:westis@gmail.com" target="_blank">westis@gmail.com</a>><br>
> <br>
>> *An additional issue:*<br>
>> 6. sac_scale is currently the only tag (possibly together with mtb:scale)<br>
>> to denote the difficulty of a hiking trail (that is, the way, not the<br>
>> route). But it's very geared towards alpine trails and there is not enough<br>
>> nuance in the lowest levels.<br>
> <br>
> As a climber, I don't think we'd want to apply YDS to hiking trails.<br>
> To me, YDS should only used for technical routes requiring equipment<br>
> (usually).<br>
<br>
As a Sierra Club member in Southern California (where the YDS originated long before my time), a hiker and a former climber I must mention that 1, 2, 3, and 4 on the YDS are basically levels of difficulty in hiking. Climbers really only work with 5 and its various subdivisions. Ruling out the whole scale simply because one level of it is dedicated to climbing is a bit much.<br>
<br>
OTOH, the Australians have a bush walking scale that does not, from what I’ve seen, include levels for climbing so that might be choice that does not automatically connote a different outdoor activity.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>So would we try & combine a walking scale & a climbing / alpine scale into one, or have two scales?</div><div><br></div><div>Two would probably make a lot more sense, with "Walking / Hiking" 1 - 5, then sac starting at about 4/5.</div><div><br></div><div>Something else that I've just thought about & not sure whether it would need to be mentioned - possibility of encountering dangerous wildlife?</div><div><br></div><div>Yes, there are 1000 things in the Australian bush that'll kill you :-), but none of them will actually eat you! (not even Drop Bears! <a href="https://australianmuseum.net.au/learn/animals/mammals/drop-bear/">https://australianmuseum.net.au/learn/animals/mammals/drop-bear/</a> :-)) Same applies to (virtually?) all of Western Europe, but how about North America, Africa, Asia & so on? Do we have / need a way of tagging that bears (or whatever) may be encountered while walking in this area? <br></div><div><br></div><div>
Thanks<div><br></div><div>Graeme</div></div><br></div></div>