[Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

bkil bkil.hu+Aq at gmail.com
Wed Jul 22 15:27:40 UTC 2020

> I wonder if carrying a bicycle (possibly folded) would also be prohibited
> on these unpaved ways?
> As was mentioned in the last thread, the rules for most federal wilderness
> areas in the USA strictly prohibit possession of any bicycle on the
> property, whether the wheels ever touch the ground or not. Rangers will
> fine the violators.

We don't have such areas around here but I have heard about them. The
concept is that tracked vehicles disturb and compact the ground and kill
many creatures that you are not aware of compared to bipedal locomotion. It
is thus imperative that if you dismount and push the bike, it still leaves
a track and still does a bit of destruction along the way. Wooden ways
similar to that depicted may also be more dangerous (and you could also
easily get a flat tire along the way and then potentially want to sue them).

If you were to carry it on your back (for whatever twisted reason), it
would not cause any harm, but then what is the point of carrying a bike
around for dozens of kilometers in the wilderness?

I think they usually don't have many provisions for foldable bicycles in
the USA because it doesn't have as much culture as in Europe or in the UK.

> To me, the simplest and most logical tagging approach would be:
>  - bicycle=no means no bicycles, ridden or otherwise
>  - bicycle=dismount means pushing is allowed
>  - other values can be used for even more restrictive situations:
> bicycle=carried, bicycle=folded, bicycle=boxed...
> But the problem with this, as I've learned, is decades of tagging by
> mappers who had no experience with the idea of bicycles being completely
> prohibited, so used bicycle=no to mean bicycle=dismount in situations where
> foot traffic was permitted.
> If this unfortunate tagging practice really needs to be preserved (the
> idea of retagging so many bicycle=no ways is certainly daunting) then I'd
> suggest a new key, dismounted_bicycle=*, which will function as a
> regulation key (like smoking=*) rather than a vehicle access key. Total
> bicycle prohibition would be encoded with both bicycle=no and
> dismounted_bicycle=no, and other dismounted_bicycle=* values can be
> developed for whatever the regulations are in particular situations.
> Jason

According to OSM wiki history, `bicycle=dismount` is a pretty recent tag,
perhaps less than 7 years old. I think `bicycle=no` was invented much
earlier. Hence it is you who wants to redefine a well established tag.

According to the first version of access=* in 2006:

> <tag k="bicycle" v="closed"/> Closed to or unsuitable for bicycle traffic
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200722/60147def/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list