[Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

David Bannon dbannon at internode.on.net
Mon Feb 23 22:36:18 UTC 2015

On Mon, 2015-02-23 at 14:13 -0800, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> Forget the fee.

> What about "official" vs. "unofficial".
> A campsite supported by the landowner may be fee or not.
Not so sure. The different types of camp site Jan is trying to identify
are very different. Many people have quite strong preferences in this

Paraphrasing Jan and extending a bit we have a number of official ones -

Commercial Camp Sites - A fee, good facilities. Formal, Crowded. Usually
defined 'Pitches', as many as possible. Someone in charge.

Free Camping Site - No (or nominal) fee, informal, some facilities (?),
sometimes limited length of stay. Community feel, self managed. Better
space between users. Tend to be used by caravan and motor home people.
Few tents. Sometimes 'hosted' by some other body, a hotel, local
government, land owner.

Wild Camp - Remote, usually no facilities, maybe in a designated area.
More tents and swags than caravans and motor homes. Pitches often
isolated from each other. Typically associated with National or State
Parks. Sometimes a fee.

Hmm, not really happy with those categories, some cross over.

> A habitually used camp spot may have a home on OSM, but should be
> marked as "not supported by the landowner or land manager".
> Same for unofficial trails.

Yes I agree. Depending on where you are in the world, such things are
more or less acceptable.


More information about the Tagging mailing list