That seems very wrong, as we tag parking lots with access=private and they are still mapped and rendered.
They are a camp site visited by hundreds, if not thousands of people, just a private one. A camp I worked at handled 1500 scouts in 6 weeks during the season! All of them had to be driven there into the high mountains - sure would be nice to have it labeled! it is not a private residence, it’s just a club building/facility, like a church, an office, or a factory. these are famous access places for millions people in america and abroad, and well known and labeled on regional maps. USGS http://www.efgh.com/c2c/c2ccuyamaca.gif <http://www.efgh.com/c2c/c2ccuyamaca.gif> Camp Hual-cu-cuish is a private boy scout camp (SW of the lake). Labeled on official US maps. the camp was destroyed by a wildfire in 2007 and is off of new park maps http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7484/15786015388_f69ba493ca.jpg Javbw. > On Mar 30, 2015, at 6:43 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > 2015-03-30 4:01 GMT+02:00 johnw <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>: > They are just private facilities, but they should be properly tagged as a > camp site, as people drive long distances to take scouts there, so they > should be searchable and routable. > > > IMHO scout camps, while they merit to be mapped in certain cases (recurring > camp on the same spot, or camp exists for at least several months), should > not be tagged with tourism=camp_site. As you write, they are private > facilities and no-one can go there to camp besides the scouts of the > organization that operates the camp. > > Cheers, > Martin > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
