As a public right of way, the highway exists by law - regardless of any evidence on the ground or lack thereof.
I suggest not removing the section, but instead setting as disused:highway. This is what I tend to do when the PROW route is clearly inaccessible from aerial imagery (e.g. due to new buildings, or rivers). Of course, as has also been mentioned, if you do come across situations like this on a ground survey - then please do report to your local authority, who have a legal obligation to clear any obstacles or re-route the path. -----Original Message----- From: ael via Talk-GB <talk-gb@openstreetmap.org> Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 12:01 PM To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Bridleway across field On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 09:36:31AM +0000, Mark Lee via Talk-GB wrote: > Hello. I've just added a missing public bridleway ( > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/882278479) which is detailed on the > WIltshire Definitive Map. It runs across a field and doesn't appear to > have been in use recently, I couldn't see it on the ground in person > and I can't see it in any of the aerial images. It runs fairly close > to a concrete I have come across some of these where it is no longer possible to walk or ride. Especially when they cross rivers where there was presumably once a ford. In at least one case that I surveyed, there were large trees blocking access on the river bank, and absolutely no sign of a ford in the river itself. Crossing there looked potentially dangerous. These had been added by armchair mappers from a definitive map. OSM should not direct users onto useless and perhaps dangerous ways. As I recall, in that case I removed the section crossing the river and added a note. ael _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
