Thanks Phil
You put it well.
In my experience we demolish the illegal track making it impassable
and get an undertaking from Parks Vic that they will endeavour to
maintain it that way. We add a lifetime prefix and as a matter of
courtesy contact the mapper . So far it works.
Tony Forster
Friends of Lysterfield Park
Hi Folks,
Personally, I believe if the managing agency requests that the
tracks be removed from the map then as good corporate citizens we
should do everything possible to lower the promotion of such tracks.
Track managers also have a responsibility to also actively advise
people and if the area is high use then signage and rehabilitation
at the locations will help.
Track rehabilitation, even when undertaken actively, can take many,
many years and there will likely be remains of the
closed/abandoned/rehabilitated tracks showing in some environments,
on some imagery, for an extended period of time.
I donât believe that the abandoned or disused tags adequately
reflect the desire of the managers but it is supported by some. Some
users may see those tags as an âopportunityâ to reopen the
track and promote use back to previous levels and they may do this
without the backing of the agency.
In a nutshell, in this instance, they are asking for folks to stop
going there. I also feel that if a track has active rehabilitation
being undertaken then a better tag would be
rehabilitated:highway=type along with access=no. Many such tracks
will get limited rehabilitation at the âtake off pointsâ only
and the rest of the track will be left to very slowly rehabilitate,
maybe with some occasional bars to impede water flow and allow
buildup of debris. Again, it will take many years for full
rehabilitation to take place.
So my view isâ¦
* If you cant see the track on the imagery â delete it.
* If you can see the track in imagery â then tag it appropriately
to discourage use as per the managers desire. Also work with the
managers to actively close the tracks if you desire. Obviously if
you are concerned on the tagging then its also likely that the area
is a favourite place for you. Work with the managers!
* Work with and encourage app developers to ensure suitably tagged
tracks do not appear on public maps
Cheers â Phil (aka tastracks)
Full disclosure â I ran Track Management for Tasmanian Parks and
Wildlife for many years so I am slightly biased.
From: Sebastian S. <mapp...@consebt.de>
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2023 7:32 AM
To: talk-au@openstreetmap.org; Andrew Harvey
<andrew.harv...@gmail.com>; Mark Pulley <mrpul...@iinet.net.au>
Cc: OpenStreetMap-AU Mailing List <talk-au@openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Deletion of informal paths by NSW NPWS
I recall these discussions vaguely.
Was not one of the reasons for removing them from the map as the
rangers or gov wanted them to be renaturatin etc. So from that
perspective I understand why not having them in a map is in their
interests.
On 21 September 2023 11:25:02 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey
<andrew.harv...@gmail.com <mailto:andrew.harv...@gmail.com> > wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sept 2023 at 20:57, Mark Pulley <mrpul...@iinet.net.au
<mailto:mrpul...@iinet.net.au> > wrote:
I know this has been discussed on the list before, but the NSW NPWS
has deleted some informal paths at Apsley Falls (Oxley Wild Rivers
National Park).
These were deleted in 2022 by a NPWS employee, and after discussion
were reverted. I re-surveyed them later that year.
These paths have been recently deleted again, initially edited by a
different NPWS employee. (Three different change sets, summarised
below.)
I had thought the consensus last time was to leave the paths in,
tagged as informal=yes (unless the path has been formally closed, in
which case access=no can be used). Is this still the case? Also, do
we need to add a policy to the wiki for similar situations?
We have
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Cycling_and_Foot_Paths#Closed/Illegal_Path
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Cycling_and_Foot_Paths#Closed/Illegal_Paths>
Informal Paths (informal=yes) - these would still show up as for
use, but with the note that they may not be maintained, may not have
signage etc.
Closed Paths (abandoned:highway=* or disused:highway=* + access=no)
- These should not show up as for use, but still be present in OSM
data for users looking for closed paths.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
