<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Ian,</p>
<p><span lang="EN-US">+1. The AWTGS </span>looks excellent as it
works from an international perspective. I've also struggled with
the SAC scale in the UK and Sweden, also both countries where the
bulk of rural footpaths are barely "alpine" and also came to the
conclusion that what matters is the type of people wanting to use
the path rather than specific physical attributes of the path. And
particularly at the less hardcore end. If one substitutes
"hiking" for "bushwalking", it works in those countries as well,
IMHO.</p>
<p>The categories I've played with conceptually are:<br>
</p>
<p>- I could take my very elderly mother</p>
<p>- Suitable for inexperienced walkers in everyday footwear (which
could include high heels). Less charitably: City folks stroll.<br>
</p>
<p>- Could I get a push-chair/stroller down here? (and by extension
assisted wheel-chair)<br>
</p>
<p>- I'm fine with walking but don't want to be using my arms,
(balance, holding-on, hauling myself up).</p>
<p>- I'm fine with scrambling but don't take me anywhere where I'll
be nervous about falling off.<br>
</p>
<p>- Bring it on<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I think the system satisfies the above in a nice linear fashion
without too many categories. I'd be interested to know what the
mysterious <span lang="EN-US">AS 2156.1-2001 </span>6th one is.
Copied from the URL provided:<br>
</p>
<ul>
<li style="list-style-type:disc">Grade One is suitable for people
with a disability with assistance</li>
<li style="list-style-type:disc">Grade Two is suitable for
families with young children</li>
<li style="list-style-type:disc">Grade Three is recommended for
people with some bushwalking experience</li>
<li style="list-style-type:disc">Grade Four is recommended for
experienced bushwalkers, and</li>
<li style="list-style-type:disc">Grade Five is recommended for
very experienced bushwalkers</li>
</ul>
<p>Mike<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2022-01-28 16:41,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:iansteer@iinet.net.au">iansteer@iinet.net.au</a> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:015301d81409$b2959bc0$17c0d340$@iinet.net.au">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style>@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}</style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I think we should be
considering the Australian Walking Track Grading System. It
seems to have been defined by the Victorians (Forest Fire
Management - <a
href="https://www.ffm.vic.gov.au/recreational-activities/walking-and-camping/australian-walking-track-grading-system"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.ffm.vic.gov.au/recreational-activities/walking-and-camping/australian-walking-track-grading-system</a>).
The AWTGS defines 5 track grades.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">It appears to have been
adopted by National Parks here in WA, NT, SA, QLD and NSW,
and Bush Walking Australia.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I have tagged a few
tracks (where there were officially signed with a “Class”)
as “awtgs=” (however someone in Germany has since deleted
those tags without reference to me!)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Australian Standard AS
2156.1-2001 is titled “Walking Tracks, Part 1:
Classification and signage”. However, I don’t have a
subscription to read the contents of this standard to see
how it compares with the AWTGS. Other documentation I have
seen refers to the AS scheme as having 6 levels<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Ian<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>