Thanks Tony for providing your images.
I see those signs quite often and don't register them when I ride.
https://app.box.com/s/wawk2d19abv5ic65h5daslgqj6xrhqut
If this sign is to be taken literally (as in what is on the ground) the only 'formed management trail' is the Dargon Track and Lanes track and small sections of the other tracks. As the tracks are not formed, or maintained by Parks (with the exception of a lawn mow here or there for fire management purposes). Therefore all other trails including this one should have an appropriate 'access' tag that reflects this. (not specific restrictions)
The long worded sign identifies that if you are not allowed to ride there is a 'no bikes' symbol is displayed. (https://app.box.com/s/t66300e74l19nr9dwsl7h9b8l25jt0bd)
Similar statement here:
Both maps on the parks site are out of date and do not show all the signed tracks, let alone the unsigned tracks that are used my many visitors to the area. Just because it doesn't appear on a map doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I'm happy to wait, but I already know the response from the ranger, who doesn't want to expose himself to further liabilities.
(If you could, can you ask him what regulation governs the restriction to ride a bike on an existing trails? (I know you aren't allowed to make them, but if they exist I would be interested to see the legal requirement)).
Thanks.
Stephen.
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 at 12:25 PM
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Cc: talk-au <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Unauthorised bike trails in national parks
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Cc: talk-au <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Unauthorised bike trails in national parks
Thanks stev391 and others for the feedback and the welcome.
Re real world indications of bicycle=no, there is a lot of signage in
the area indicating that only formed and signed bike trails can be
used and that the creation and use of other tracks is illegal.
https://app.box.com/s/a7215oibuxni7igetyr1onq7yhowfkk1
Map of authorised bike paths at Horswood Rd
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-37.96593/145.30346
https://app.box.com/s/v0d7q8og4qwtzp6ke43u84a9jbkkha84
Detail of above stating "Ride only on formed trails designated for
cycling. Do not take shortcuts or make new trails."
https://app.box.com/s/v2s8dl3q3a86gnuwlig2ez9ygsbzngif
sign at cnr Logan Park Rd and Wellington Rd "Please remain on formed
Management tracks only, penalties apply"
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-37.93742/145.31140
https://app.box.com/s/t66300e74l19nr9dwsl7h9b8l25jt0bd
Detail of sign "Cyclists are not permitted ... to ride on tracks...
other than those designated for mountain bike riding"
https://app.box.com/s/rldybfj6gfscfr3zwc7jd20tac7yho7y
Detail of sign, map showing authorised trails
https://app.box.com/s/wawk2d19abv5ic65h5daslgqj6xrhqut
Sign at cnr Dargon Tk and Wellington Rd
https://app.box.com/s/gy198r926p05g3f6wgt41hkm2p0jwswy
Example of signage on authorised bike track (Dargon Track)
Thanks for the photo of Ant Trail. Another at the link below
https://app.box.com/s/n13xkced9ra4bv97xf1xqspl3xptnht5
Ant trail at Sunset Tk looking east
It appears that this is not a "formed track" or a "designated track".
The signage in the area therefore indicates that its use is illegal.
https://app.box.com/s/zbdg27crru77njfsvj58proe87qj0oif
A similar but unnamed track at
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-37.93253/145.30901
Park notes
http://parkweb.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/315692/Park-note-Lysterfield-Lake-mountain-bike-riding.pdf
http://parkweb.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/315693/Park-note-Lysterfield-Park-and-Churchill-NP.pdf
map the authorised trails and indicate that the use of other trails is
illegal. We do not always rely on on ground signage for tagging, for
example footpaths would be tagged as cars=no even though there are no
barriers or signs.
Re the name of the trail, it is unclear how widely the name Ant Trail
is known, it is not supported on the ground by eg signage.
I spoke briefly with the head ranger Lysterfield last week and expect
to talk again in the next 2 days and hope to get an official answer on
(a) the exact legal status of these trails
(b) whether Parks Vic has a position on how they should be mapped
So please hold off retagging for a couple of days.
Thanks
Tony
> TONY,THANKS FOR FIRSTLY RAISING YOUR PROPOSED EDIT PRIOR TO MAKING
> THE CHANGE (AND ALSO WELCOME TO THE OPENSTREETMAP COMMUNITY). I HAD
> NOT BEEN TO THAT TRACK IN ABOUT 6 MONTHS, SO NEEDED TO REVISIT TO SEE
> WHAT WAS ON THE GROUND BEFORE PRESENTING MY ARGUMENT. PLEASE DO NOT
> TAKE THIS AS AN ATTACK ON YOURSELF AND I HOPE THAT YOU CONTINUE TO
> CONTRIBUTE TO THE MAP. I AGREE WITH BRYCE, IT IS DEFINITELY NOT
> BICYCLE=NO AS THERE IS NOTHING IN THE REAL WORLD TO INDICATE THAT
> THIS NOT ALLOWED TO BE ACCESSED. SEE:
> HTTP://WIKI.OPENSTREETMAP.ORG/WIKI/BICYCLEWHICH STATES WHEN USING
> 'BICYLCE=NO': "WHERE BICYCLES ARE NOT PERMITTED, ENSURE THIS IS
> INDICATED "AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE BELOW REFERENCED PHOTOS, THERE
> IS NO INDICATION THAT THIS IS NOT PERMITTED. THE TRACK IS QUITE WELL
> DEFINED AND WELL USED, HERE IS SOME PHOTOS OF THE
> TRACK:HTTP://WWW.MAPILLARY.COM/MAP/IM/YU6LBMRK8FBJT1LPJZJLHW/PHOTO(YOU
> MIGHT NEED TO SCROLL OUT USING THE SCROLL WHEEL IF THE PHOTO LOOKS TOO
> ZOOMED IN)IN THAT SEQUENCE OF PHOTOS YOU CAN SEE THE FIRE ACCESS TRACK
> WHICH IS VERY UNDEFINED (JUST LOW CUT GRASS, WITH OCCASSIONAL WHEEL
> RUTS) AND A VERY CLEAR MTB TRACK. TO COUNTER THE ARGUMENTS THAT IT
> NEEDS TO BE SIGNED, THERE IS NO SIGN AT THIS INTERSECTION OF THE FIRE
> TRAILS, DOES THIS MEAN IT IS NOT DEFINED AND IS NOT ALLOWED TO BE
> ACCESSED?HTTP://WWW.MAPILLARY.COM/MAP/IM/ISYCXINLETHKLFXNARZWKW/PHOTO
> THIS TRACK APPEARS TO BE QUITE POPULAR ACCORDING TO THE STRAVA
> SEGMENTS:HTTPS://WWW.STRAVA.COM/SEGMENTS/5483327
> (SOUTHBOUND)HTTPS://WWW.STRAVA.COM/SEGMENTS/5483306 (NORTHBOUND)THIS
> ALSO SHOWS THAT THE TRACK HAS EXISTED IN THE REAL WORLD FOR AT LEAST
> 2 YEARS, BEING USED AS A BICYCLE TRACK. I ALSO REFER YOU TO THIS OSM
> WIKI PAGE:HTTPS://WIKI.OPENSTREETMAP.ORG/WIKI/HOW_WE_MAPWHICH CLEARLY
> STATES "WHEN IN DOUBT, ALSO CONSIDER THE "ON THE GROUND
> RULE": MAP THE WORLD AS IT CAN BE OBSERVED BY SOMEONE PHYSICALLY
> THERE."(SIMILAR WORDING APPEARS HERE:
> HTTPS://WIKI.OPENSTREETMAP.ORG/WIKI/DISPUTES) I PROPOSE THAT USER
> TONYF1'S EDIT SHOULD BE REVERTED AS:1) THE TRACK IS THERE AND MORE
> WELL DEFINED THAN OTHER FEATURES IN THE AREA.2) OSM IS A MAP OF WHAT
> IS IN THE WORLD, NOT WHAT COPYRIGHTED MAPS HAVE STATED.3) THIS IS A
> COMMONLY USED MOUNTAIN BIKE TRACK, WITH A RECOGNISED NAME.4)
> BICYCLE=NO REQUIRES THIS TO BE INDICATED IN THE REAL WORLD. HAPPY TO
> HEAR COUNTER POSITIONS, BASED ON OSM PRINCIPLES, NOT WHAT SOMEONE
> (PARK RANGER) SAID TO LIMIT THEIR LEGAL LIABILITY. STEPHEN. SENT:
> Friday, August 07, 2015 at 10:51 AM
> FROM: "Bryce Nesbitt" <[email protected]>
> TO: [email protected]
> CC: talk-au <[email protected]>
> SUBJECT: Re: [talk-au] Unauthorised bike trails in national parks It
> physically exists, and therefore I view it as legitimate in OSM. But
> access=no is not quite the right twist on things.It really belongs to
> a much larger category of unofficial things: from rope swings to
> campgrounds to fruit trees,that people build without the permission
> of the landowner. I often want to know the difference.
> _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au[1]
>
> _____________________________________________________ This mail has
> been virus scanned by Australia On Line see
> http://www.australiaonline.net.au/mailscanning
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
Re real world indications of bicycle=no, there is a lot of signage in
the area indicating that only formed and signed bike trails can be
used and that the creation and use of other tracks is illegal.
https://app.box.com/s/a7215oibuxni7igetyr1onq7yhowfkk1
Map of authorised bike paths at Horswood Rd
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-37.96593/145.30346
https://app.box.com/s/v0d7q8og4qwtzp6ke43u84a9jbkkha84
Detail of above stating "Ride only on formed trails designated for
cycling. Do not take shortcuts or make new trails."
https://app.box.com/s/v2s8dl3q3a86gnuwlig2ez9ygsbzngif
sign at cnr Logan Park Rd and Wellington Rd "Please remain on formed
Management tracks only, penalties apply"
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-37.93742/145.31140
https://app.box.com/s/t66300e74l19nr9dwsl7h9b8l25jt0bd
Detail of sign "Cyclists are not permitted ... to ride on tracks...
other than those designated for mountain bike riding"
https://app.box.com/s/rldybfj6gfscfr3zwc7jd20tac7yho7y
Detail of sign, map showing authorised trails
https://app.box.com/s/wawk2d19abv5ic65h5daslgqj6xrhqut
Sign at cnr Dargon Tk and Wellington Rd
https://app.box.com/s/gy198r926p05g3f6wgt41hkm2p0jwswy
Example of signage on authorised bike track (Dargon Track)
Thanks for the photo of Ant Trail. Another at the link below
https://app.box.com/s/n13xkced9ra4bv97xf1xqspl3xptnht5
Ant trail at Sunset Tk looking east
It appears that this is not a "formed track" or a "designated track".
The signage in the area therefore indicates that its use is illegal.
https://app.box.com/s/zbdg27crru77njfsvj58proe87qj0oif
A similar but unnamed track at
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-37.93253/145.30901
Park notes
http://parkweb.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/315692/Park-note-Lysterfield-Lake-mountain-bike-riding.pdf
http://parkweb.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/315693/Park-note-Lysterfield-Park-and-Churchill-NP.pdf
map the authorised trails and indicate that the use of other trails is
illegal. We do not always rely on on ground signage for tagging, for
example footpaths would be tagged as cars=no even though there are no
barriers or signs.
Re the name of the trail, it is unclear how widely the name Ant Trail
is known, it is not supported on the ground by eg signage.
I spoke briefly with the head ranger Lysterfield last week and expect
to talk again in the next 2 days and hope to get an official answer on
(a) the exact legal status of these trails
(b) whether Parks Vic has a position on how they should be mapped
So please hold off retagging for a couple of days.
Thanks
Tony
> TONY,THANKS FOR FIRSTLY RAISING YOUR PROPOSED EDIT PRIOR TO MAKING
> THE CHANGE (AND ALSO WELCOME TO THE OPENSTREETMAP COMMUNITY). I HAD
> NOT BEEN TO THAT TRACK IN ABOUT 6 MONTHS, SO NEEDED TO REVISIT TO SEE
> WHAT WAS ON THE GROUND BEFORE PRESENTING MY ARGUMENT. PLEASE DO NOT
> TAKE THIS AS AN ATTACK ON YOURSELF AND I HOPE THAT YOU CONTINUE TO
> CONTRIBUTE TO THE MAP. I AGREE WITH BRYCE, IT IS DEFINITELY NOT
> BICYCLE=NO AS THERE IS NOTHING IN THE REAL WORLD TO INDICATE THAT
> THIS NOT ALLOWED TO BE ACCESSED. SEE:
> HTTP://WIKI.OPENSTREETMAP.ORG/WIKI/BICYCLEWHICH STATES WHEN USING
> 'BICYLCE=NO': "WHERE BICYCLES ARE NOT PERMITTED, ENSURE THIS IS
> INDICATED "AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE BELOW REFERENCED PHOTOS, THERE
> IS NO INDICATION THAT THIS IS NOT PERMITTED. THE TRACK IS QUITE WELL
> DEFINED AND WELL USED, HERE IS SOME PHOTOS OF THE
> TRACK:HTTP://WWW.MAPILLARY.COM/MAP/IM/YU6LBMRK8FBJT1LPJZJLHW/PHOTO(YOU
> MIGHT NEED TO SCROLL OUT USING THE SCROLL WHEEL IF THE PHOTO LOOKS TOO
> ZOOMED IN)IN THAT SEQUENCE OF PHOTOS YOU CAN SEE THE FIRE ACCESS TRACK
> WHICH IS VERY UNDEFINED (JUST LOW CUT GRASS, WITH OCCASSIONAL WHEEL
> RUTS) AND A VERY CLEAR MTB TRACK. TO COUNTER THE ARGUMENTS THAT IT
> NEEDS TO BE SIGNED, THERE IS NO SIGN AT THIS INTERSECTION OF THE FIRE
> TRAILS, DOES THIS MEAN IT IS NOT DEFINED AND IS NOT ALLOWED TO BE
> ACCESSED?HTTP://WWW.MAPILLARY.COM/MAP/IM/ISYCXINLETHKLFXNARZWKW/PHOTO
> THIS TRACK APPEARS TO BE QUITE POPULAR ACCORDING TO THE STRAVA
> SEGMENTS:HTTPS://WWW.STRAVA.COM/SEGMENTS/5483327
> (SOUTHBOUND)HTTPS://WWW.STRAVA.COM/SEGMENTS/5483306 (NORTHBOUND)THIS
> ALSO SHOWS THAT THE TRACK HAS EXISTED IN THE REAL WORLD FOR AT LEAST
> 2 YEARS, BEING USED AS A BICYCLE TRACK. I ALSO REFER YOU TO THIS OSM
> WIKI PAGE:HTTPS://WIKI.OPENSTREETMAP.ORG/WIKI/HOW_WE_MAPWHICH CLEARLY
> STATES "WHEN IN DOUBT, ALSO CONSIDER THE "ON THE GROUND
> RULE": MAP THE WORLD AS IT CAN BE OBSERVED BY SOMEONE PHYSICALLY
> THERE."(SIMILAR WORDING APPEARS HERE:
> HTTPS://WIKI.OPENSTREETMAP.ORG/WIKI/DISPUTES) I PROPOSE THAT USER
> TONYF1'S EDIT SHOULD BE REVERTED AS:1) THE TRACK IS THERE AND MORE
> WELL DEFINED THAN OTHER FEATURES IN THE AREA.2) OSM IS A MAP OF WHAT
> IS IN THE WORLD, NOT WHAT COPYRIGHTED MAPS HAVE STATED.3) THIS IS A
> COMMONLY USED MOUNTAIN BIKE TRACK, WITH A RECOGNISED NAME.4)
> BICYCLE=NO REQUIRES THIS TO BE INDICATED IN THE REAL WORLD. HAPPY TO
> HEAR COUNTER POSITIONS, BASED ON OSM PRINCIPLES, NOT WHAT SOMEONE
> (PARK RANGER) SAID TO LIMIT THEIR LEGAL LIABILITY. STEPHEN. SENT:
> Friday, August 07, 2015 at 10:51 AM
> FROM: "Bryce Nesbitt" <[email protected]>
> TO: [email protected]
> CC: talk-au <[email protected]>
> SUBJECT: Re: [talk-au] Unauthorised bike trails in national parks It
> physically exists, and therefore I view it as legitimate in OSM. But
> access=no is not quite the right twist on things.It really belongs to
> a much larger category of unofficial things: from rope swings to
> campgrounds to fruit trees,that people build without the permission
> of the landowner. I often want to know the difference.
> _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au[1]
>
> _____________________________________________________ This mail has
> been virus scanned by Australia On Line see
> http://www.australiaonline.net.au/mailscanning
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
