[Tagging] Fwd: How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?

Kevin Kenny kevin.b.kenny+osm at gmail.com
Tue Jul 19 20:51:50 UTC 2016

Oops - sent this message from the wrong mailbox and it either bounced or
got flagged for moderation.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny at gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Tagging] How to tag: public lands that are accessed by permit?
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <tagging at openstreetmap.org>

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Colin Smale <colin.smale at xs4all.nl> wrote:

> Your examples feel like private land to me. Except for the one with the
> bull...
> Maybe this would help me see the distinction:
> How much trouble are you in, if you enter without explicit permission? Are
> you (in theory at least) risking a fine? Would it be a criminal or
> statutory offence, or a civil wrong against the landowner? Or are there no
> sanctions? How likely are you to get caught? If a policeman challenges you
> for something, will they ask to see your permit?

The last set of examples represent the spectrum of how I interpret
'access=private' - and I'm entirely comfortable with having
'access=private' for all of them.

By contrast, the 'access=permit' is, "I have to stop at the kiosk on the
way by and fill out my registration card" or "I have to make sure to have
my New York City hiker card in my pack and hang the parking tag in my car"
(both of which are free, and on the first trip I needed them, I printed
them from the web site the night before).

If I'm in the High Peaks and encounter a ranger, he will indeed ask to see
my permit (and my bear canister). If I recall correctly from people who've
gotten caught, the fine is about $300 - the judge and prosecutor have some
discretion. The relevant regulation is here

But the real distinction is - once I've complied with all the formalities,
they have to give me permission. That's totally unlike a private landowner,
who can refuse permission for any reason or no reason. And the formalities
are minimal.

That distinction is important enough that most trail maps here show the two
types of regions differently: "government land, permission required",
rather than "private land, keep out". And on my own maps, I want to follow
that convention and render them differently.

Instead of trying to suggest a tagging scheme to allow me to do what I
want, you are asserting that I shouldn't want it. You're not helping me
come up with a way to tag these two situations differently, and I assure
you that they are very different to any American hiker. Instead, you are
asserting that they are the same, and I simply should not want there to be
a difference. That is not going to help me to move forward.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20160719/52e57e48/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list