[talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 29/02/2024 12:56, Andrew Welch via Talk-au wrote:
> Part of the reason why we want them to map the way 
> we map is because it shows clearly that while there is a path there, it 
> is informal (so downstream users shouldn't treat it as a path) and 
> usually considered private property (again, so downstream users 
> shouldn't use it as a path). Tagging it that way also stops someone 
> mapping from aerial imagery, previous GPS tracks, and other sources, 
> from going and adding it back in.

Further reasons for mapping informal paths:

1. Orientation. Imagine you have memorized the map, and you know that 
after the bend you are to take the first path to the right. Now, if the 
"first path to the right" that you encounter is an informal one that has 
been deleted from the map, you might accidentally walk that path rather 
than the one you intended to take.

2. Search and rescue. If someone is lost somewhere, then informal paths 
would certainly be a good starting point to go looking for them - 
provided you know where these informal paths are.

3. Emergency. In an emergency situation it can be important to know 
about a path even if you're not allowed to use it.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"