[Tagging] Access by permit

[Warin]

On 18-Sep-17 04:47 PM, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
> On 18 September 2017 at 14:55, Kevin Kenny 
> <kevin.b.kenny+osm at gmail.com <mailto:kevin.b.kenny+osm at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:30 AM, Dave Swarthout
>     <daveswarthout at gmail.com <mailto:daveswarthout at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         I'm trying to tag some stocked fishing ponds that reside on a
>         military reservation in Alaska, Fort Greely. The ponds are
>         stocked by the Alaska Department of Fish & Game but require a
>         special permit for access. This is from the Department of Fish
>         & Game website:
>
>         These lakes are on military land. A permit is required to
>         legally access these lakes. For Army land a Recreational
>         Access Permit (RAP) is required.
>
>         access=permissive isn't quite right nor is access=private.
>
>
>
>
>     For me, and apparently for you, there's a big difference between
>     'this land is private', and 'access to this land requires certain
>     formalities to be complied with, but permission is ordinarily
>     granted.' But i appear to be imagining that the difference is
>     important, since nobody else on the planet sees it.
>
>
> You can count me in there as well, 'cause I've got a similar'ish sort 
> of question, thanks gents :-)
>
> Just off the Queensland coast, there are a number of large, sand 
> islands, which are reached by ferry (in one case, by bridge) & are 
> very popular tourist destinations. eg Fraser Island: 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=8/-25.322/152.732
>
> These islands are controlled by Qld National Parks & anybody is 
> allowed to visit them, but to drive on the island, either on the beach 
> or inland tracks, you must have a vehicle permit, which can be simply 
> bought either online, or from various retailers - newsagents, service 
> stations etc. The main beaches on each of these islands are also the 
> main roads to travel around the island, & are, in fact, designated 
> public roads, where normal speed limits, licensing requirements, 
> alcohol limits etc all apply, & are enforced by Police.
>
> So how should they be marked?
>
> They're open to the general public until National Parks says no, so 
> that's permissive?
>
> But you need a permit, so does that make them private?
>
> Maybe they should be marked as toll=yes, although there's no 
> toll-booth where you can pay?
>
> & then how do you mark the entire Island, or just the main beach, as 
> needing a permit? Marked tracks can be tagged easily enough, but the 
> beach is just a beach!
>
> Looking forward to working something out! :-)
>

The Kokoda Trail, New Guinea has similar requirements - for walkers. A 
permit with a fee ... the fact that some road/path has no tool booth 
does not mean a toll/fee is not charged.
Arr yes .. the Simpson Desert, Australia has a similar permit thing .. 
for vehicles.

Where a toll/fee is charged then which tag to use fee=* or toll=* ??? 
This should be separate from the access consideration. I would think 
both are the same thing and should be combined at some stage.

There are different difficulties of  gaining a 'permit'. Some have a 
numerical limit, some a schedule, some are simply a paperwork exercise.
There are numerical limits on popular walking tracks to stop overuse 
(e.g. Milford Track New Zealand, Overland Track Australia).
A fair proportion of South Australia has a scheduled permit system so 
that you are not on the rocket firing range when it is in that use.

They all tend towards access=private.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20170918/2003cdab/attachment.html>