Yes, my family and I were there this weekend. We particularly liked the pastoral field views from Lincoln Road. Amazing fall colors and sun! I asked my question imprecisely: I meant if this was an established route published in some trail guide by a land manager, etc. No matter either way. Thanks.

Hi Alan. Is this specific route referenced somewhere? Is there a reason this point-to-point was put in? Thanks.

Please stop going around the world renaming buildings without any firsthand knowledge. How do you know that this building is not named "Greenhouse"? Please engage the local mapping community first.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112844607

Hello. There is a map from the land manager that label the building like this. There is also a "Greenhouse" and a "Community Garden" labeled as such too. Are you planning to remove those labels too? https://www.massaudubon.org/content/download/2984/34082/file/habitat_trails_2016.pdf
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112831483

an oversight. fixed. Thanks for the catch.

No worries. I mostly use the JOSM editing tool that I find easier to do such changes...however, it's a much steeper learning curve to get up and running.

The "digital gate" should really be the parcel cadastre aligned correctly. If there is something physically on the ground, then that can get represented as a barrier or a sign. Also, the trail can get split and the "old" section tagged with "access=no" or removed altogether if it's clearly "removed" on the ground.

I had a chance already to spruce up the parcels in that area. Yes, some were misaligned (at least according to the latest MassGIS parcel data...which isn't always correct). I combined some of the parcels to the south to create a larger "Wylde Woods" for the town-owned land. Please let me know if anything looks amiss. I can use strava heatmap data to better align the trails.

If you like, I'm happy to collaborate with you more closely to get everything looking good. Perhaps we can have a screen share sometime or a call? Also, I hope to make it down that way soon enough to hike and explore with my son. We've been making our way around many conservation properties in greater Boston.

Hello. I saw you requested a review. Always good to see "public" land managers directly engaging with the data.

You added a couple of features that are "non-standard": a line added with a landuse to indicate boundary with private property.

I see this whole area's public parcel could use some sprucing up. I've never hiked these lands and am not familiar. But I have access to MassGIS parcels data and OpenSpace layer to guide me. I've been slowly making my way through "public parcels" throughout the state. Many had not been touched since the initial MassGIS OpenSpace layer import from 10 years ago.

I'll send you a message when I've done for your review. Check out my edits to see what I've been up to elsewhere. Will be in touch soon...

Ok, well that certainly sounds like "ground-truthing" that OSMers strive for. However, as it's not an "official" name, I'd urge you to reconsider adding this non-family-friendly name. These things get sucked up by the trails apps (Gaia/Alltrails/etc). Thanks.

Hello. Do you have a reference to support naming this trail as you did? Thanks.

Do you have a second reference to support adding this trail to OSM besides Strava? Or have you seen this first hand? This "trail" is not on any trail map I've seen.

This trail has been closed years ago. There is no longer a bridge over the river here.

A broader discussion for the OSM community: does horse=yes tagging implies some sort of suitability of being able to ride a horse on those trails? ...especially without additional "horse_scale=*" tagging My direct local experience is yes it does. Though it may be "technically" correct, I think it's confusing and misleading. And though we're not supposed to tag for the renderers, the likes of Gaia are representing these trails differently.

Thanks, really appreciate seeing the reference. I didn't even know that site existed. Perhaps you could include this reference in subsequent changeset comments.

On most of the trails, in decades of hiking there, I have never seen a horse or mountain bike. I don't think you could even physically get a horse or mountain bike UP those trails unless you were carrying either on your back.

I have yet to find an online reference saying they are NOT allowed, but I thought I recalled seeing some signage but not recently. I'll continue to look. In any event, I think you'd get a chuckle from some local folk if they saw horse=yes on some of those trails.

Pretty sure bicycles and horses are not allowed on most of the "hiking trails" in the WMNF. E.g. Fishin' Jimmy Trail now has horse=yes and bicycle=yes with your changeset. Was this added in error? If not would appreciate a reference to support this change. Thanks.

I'm curious: what is the "TR" ref referring to? E.g. on Kinsman Ridge Trail it's tagged with ref=TR 31030. Do you have a link that supports this desgination? Thanks.

It would seem most/all of these newly added trails in the WMNF are illegal. Do you have any references to support a "bicycle=yes" tag? Thanks.

...and per wilderness area laws, people should not be creating new trails. There is controversy on what should and should not get mapped. But I believe we as an OSM community should not be mapping bushwhacks as it encourages/facilitates behavior that is against public policy.

Anyone can walk anywhere on these public lands. But mapping these bushwhacks is akin to "creating new trails" because it encourages dense usage/erosion of a strip of land.

Hello. I don't believe these types of bushwhacks should be added to OSM. They are not official trails. They are not marked, etc. Strava heatmap data alone is not sufficient to warrant mapping in OSM. Have you personally seen evidence of these trails? Even if there is a herd path somewhat visible, what do you see is the value of mapping this? Thanks.

I said nothing about liability. And I'm not hostile about armchair mapping. I just think there's a high risk of bad mapping when singularly using Strava data without a secondary reference (personal knowledge, another map, etc.) My people getting lost comment is a sentiment that guides my OSM mapping. "Would I be comfortable if a friend used this data to plan their hiking trip" etc.

From the wiki (osm.wiki/Armchair_mapping)

"Take particular care before attempting to map hiking trails from your armchair. Someone who follows a noexit=* mapped road in their car, will likely just curse their GPS and take another route. However, some serious obstacles in forest areas are easy to miss from aerial imagery. Remember the map user can't tell that one trail has been mapped by a hiker who has done it, and another trail may have been mapped by a virtual hiker who may have never been near the trail."

Allow me to end this on a friendly note: I see you have a ton of edits. Thanks for your contribution to the OSM community.

It should bug you. It's irresponsible to map trails just from Strava that you have not seen evidence of firsthand and/or you are able to verify against maps for an organization with some oversight responsibility. Not to be overly dramatic, but how would you feel if someone got lost or hurt trying to follow these "trails" that you mapped? We should strive to be curators of useful knowledge, not just blindly copying over lines from Strava.

I get a bit worked up about this sort of thing because this data gets sucked up by the likes of Gaia and AllTrails and becomes part of their ecosystem, often without the nuances of the more esoteric OSM tagging. Even if it gets deleted in OSM, it may take a long time before that change is reflected in the third-party mapping apps.

So....please remove ASAP. Thanks.