[talk-au] Hiking tracks: foot=yes or foot=designated?
snowgum at gmx.com
Wed Feb 24 06:07:09 GMT 2010
Steve Bennett wrote:
> Absolutely we should. Routes like that appear on maps. For example,
> there's a part of the Overland Track where John Chapman publishes an
> alternative route around Lake St Clair. There's no track, and his map
> uses a different kind of line to indicate "route" rather than "track".
But is it a wilderness area, where route markers are prohibited?
> Any route that we publish would probably have long straight line
> sections, so the paths that actual walkers would follow would vary
> significantly from that anyway, depending on local vegetation etc.
They'd obviously gravitate towards the route showing on the GPS in their
Now if only we could include an area as part of a route.
More information about the Talk-au