[Talk-us] Beaver dam? Wrecked bridge? Hallucinatory roads in TIGER?

[Bryan Housel]

> On Dec 20, 2014, at 11:09 AM, Kevin Kenny <kkenny2 at nycap.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> In at least one place (44.07447,-74.28335, says GPS) the trail crosses an unnamed tributary of Pine Brook on a beaver dam that is visible in aerial images. https://flic.kr/p/pFf3TV Hikers who don't quite believe that the trail would do such a thing have created a use path extending up- and downstream that peters out in both directions. So - What's appropriate tagging for a way that uses a beaver dam?

I’d just mark that section `ford=yes`.. or I guess `ford=beaver_dam` if you want to be clever.  
(The `ford` tag works like `bridge`)


> In several other places, destroyed bridges either serve as landmarks https://flic.kr/p/oJrAXF  or even have had the stone of their footings repurposed to create a ford https://flic.kr/p/poN2vf  .  Is there tagging that makes sense for this situation?

Again, `ford=*`


> Is it considered acceptable to delete ways that came in from TIGER and appear never to have existed? In this case, I speak of roads shown in TIGER where I've hiked across the routes and seen no sign of even an abandoned road - and I use century-old abandoned grades for off-trail hiking fairly often. I know what to look for even when the roadbed is grown to trees. For instance, to my eye, it's obvious that https://flic.kr/p/nouCUC was once a road. In some cases, I can't imagine what the TIGER people were smoking (and wish they'd share!).

Sure, I remove TIGER ways all the time.  If you have local knowledge of the area, feel free to change the map to match reality.


Thanks, Bryan