Important thing to note is that
while nothing makes you obligated
to map tracks in some area,
recommendations/guidelines like this
are not allowing you to delete existing objects
mapped by someone else.
25 Oct 2020, 07:31 by [email protected]:
> Hi Phil, thanks for drafting this, it’s great to have a concrete statement to
> discuss. I agree with the broad sentiment but suggest two changes, one minor
> and the other more substantive, as follows.... (deletions in strike through
> and additions in all caps)....
>
>
> 4. Caution should be exercised if considering mapping of ‘tracks, routes and
> pads’ in > remote> CONSERVATION reserves, as they may well be covered by
> management plans, standards or regulations which seek to minimise publicity.
> Such regulations or standards (> AS2156 <>> ) may request that the location
> of such ‘tracks’ are not publicised on maps. > You should seek clarification
> from the managing authority prior to adding such tracks. > MAPPERS ARE
> ENCOURAGED TO PERUSE RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLANS ON THE WEB OR TO DISCUSS EDITS
> WITH AGENCY STAFF WHEN CONSIDERING ADDING TRACKS IN CONSERVATION RESERVES.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Rationale for changes... (1) not all sensitive areas are remote, and many
> issues arise in reserves close to major cities. (2). Understanding the
> broader context surrounding a potential mapping change may well be a hallmark
> of good mapping, but mappers bear no responsibility to await a decision from
> a management agency *before* they add or edit tracks.
>
>
>
>
>
> A likely response from an under-staffed government agency to an unknown
> mapper is something like, “Thank you for your message. Your call is important
> to us. We will endeavour to respond to you at the earliest opportunity.”
> Repeatedly. I would suggest that a less declarative statement is far more
> appropriate in this instance.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks once again, I appreciate everyone’s input on the issue. Best wishes
> Ian
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> On 25 Oct 2020, at 10:59 am, Phil Wyatt <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> For the Australian Tagging Guidelines can I suggest the following text as
>> point 4 under bushwalking and Cycling Tracks Notes….
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 4. Caution should be exercised if considering mapping of ‘tracks, routes and
>> pads’ in remote reserves, as they may well be covered by management plans,
>> standards or regulations which seek to minimise publicity. Such regulations
>> or standards (AS2156) may request that the location of such ‘tracks’ are
>> not publicised on maps. You should seek clarification from the managing
>> authority prior to adding such tracks.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers - Phil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
