[talk-au] "Removing closed or illegal trails." (in Nerang National Park)

[Warin]

On 29/10/21 3:58 pm, Phil Wyatt wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> In this case the user name of NTCA is a bit of a hint. Took me a 
> couple of minutes to find this group
>
> https://www.facebook.com/nerangtrailcare/ 
> <https://www.facebook.com/nerangtrailcare/> - Nerang Trail Care Alliance
>
> In this case I would agree with the deletions
>

A trail local to me was closed off .. but still evident 'on the ground'.

IIRC I market it disused:highway=* with access=no, I think that removed 
it from most maps. OSMand now displays it .. if you look for it, and 
that fairly well describes its appearance on the ground. I am tempted to 
go abandoned:highway=* now some years later if I have not already, it is 
now rather over grown at least at the access points. I'll put it into OHM.

Another path has a 'track closed' sign on it .. but only on one end. It 
is in frequent use by bicycle riders from the 'track closed' end (down 
hill). I have removed a section on the map near the sign, but it is 
there for any one to see on the ground. I might have a word to the 
rangers, when they come to do some work in my street next week, about 
it. I may know of at least one of the riders using the track... I 
believe the fine is over $3,000.


My opinion: I disagree with deletions until it is gone - when it cannot 
be seen. Tag it with what is in effect .. access=no (signs?), 
disused:highway=* is fading due to lack of use/ revegetation. Possibly 
add the tag description=illegal/*.


While NTCA may have 'good intentions' the map is about what is there not 
what might be wanted.


> *From:*osm.talk-au at thorsten.engler.id.au 
> <osm.talk-au at thorsten.engler.id.au>
> *Sent:* Friday, 29 October 2021 2:05 PM
> *To:* 'OSM Australian Talk List' <talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
> *Subject:* [talk-au] "Removing closed or illegal trails." (in Nerang 
> National Park)
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/112722497 
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/112722497>
>
> “Removing closed or illegal trails. Tidy up of Fire Roads and places”
>
> My opinion on the topic is:
>
> If it exists on the ground, it gets mapped. If there is no legal 
> access, that's access=no or access=private. If it's a path that has 
> been created by traffic where it's not officially meant to go, it's 
> informal=yes.
>
> That seems to be in line with the previously established consensus on 
> the list here: 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-September/012863.html 
> <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2019-September/012863.html>
>
> I have no local knowledge of the area and am not really invested in 
> this one way or another, but I feel that paths that verifiably 
> physically exist on the ground (which I assume these are) shouldn’t be 
> simply deleted. If access is legally prohibited in some way, then the 
> tags should reflect that, not the way simply being deleted.
>
> What’s the general opinion about this?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Thorsten
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20211029/c1742da8/attachment.htm>