Organised Editing/Activities/National Trust Paths
The National Trust (nationaltrust.org.uk) is a charity set up to look after special places in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Now the largest land owner in the area we operate, the National Trust cares for more than 250,000 hectares of land including 775 miles of coastline, 100,000 hectares of statutory wildlife sites, 28,000 buildings and structures, 300 historic mansions and gardens. The National Trust operates a membership business model which provides members with complimentary access to our pay-for-entry visitor attractions, but also seeks to provide extensive free access to the countryside. The pay-for-entry visitor attractions welcomed 2.5 million visitors in 2018, and an estimated 300 million visits to countryside sites. Recent internal analysis estimates that National Trust look after a network of 25,000 Km of paths which comprises both legally designated ‘Public Rights of Way’ (25%) and permissive paths (75%).
Project Background
Currently, there is no single digital inventory of paths in the UK. This project aims to capture a digital inventory of paths on National Trust land in order to:
- Demonstrate how we are fulfilling our core purpose of providing access to special places.
- Improve asset management including maintenance and enhancement of the path network.
- Provide a digital base for trail curation and enhanced visitor experiences.
We are proposing to use OpenStreetMap to utilise 'crowd' contributions to the path inventory from the Trust's local staff and volunteer network, as well as the wider OSM community. Our aim is to capture path data (path routes and access tags) against a tagging schema (below) to build a consistent, comprehensive picture of paths and associated access for walkers, runners, cyclists and horse riders. By using our network of property teams, we can use local knowledge combined with aerial imagery/GPS traces to ensure we are compliant with copyright rules. The data is then available royalty-free to anybody for the development of products to encourage appropriate access to our special places.
Proposal (2019-2023)
We are proposing to capture Public Rights of Way (footpaths, bridleways, restricted byways and byways open to all traffic) and paths the Trust permits access (permissive access on publicly accessible land and paths behind pay-for-entry barriers) and tag access following the schema below. Doing so ensures National Trust staff and volunteers capture path data consistently. Our hope is this will improve the overall quality of path and access data in OpenStreetMap.
We propose that we would:
- Review existing path data on National Trust managed land.
- Utilise our ranger network/property based staff for on-the-ground knowledge to verify the data.
- Create any path networks which do not exist, split/amend any existing routes where needed.
- Tag paths consistently using the guidance, updating any existing tags that contradict this (e.g. if a RoW is not tagged as such).
We do not propose to delete any routes in OpenStreetMap which exist and are verifiable on the ground.
Monitoring
Once paths have been updated in line with local property knowledge, we are pro-actively monitoring the paths for any further changes. The monitoring process is automated and notifies local staff to changes (path routes created, amended & access tags) in their area of knowledge so that changes can be checked against the reality on the ground. We can make this code open for the community to use should they be interested.
Path Tagging Guidance
England & Wales
We have worked with OSMUK and other partners to develop the following tagging guidance for National Trust staff and volunteers to follow when capturing paths in OpenStreetMap (previous version seen at the OSMUK community meet up in London on 29/06/2019 - see PDF). If you have any questions, comments or feedback, please comment in the discussion tab.
| Physical Property | legal/access permissions | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| highway | designation | foot | horse | bicycle | vehicle | motor_vehicle | |||
|
path/ etc. [2] .
|
Public Right of Way | Footpath | public_footpath | designated | no | no | no | no | |
| permissive/private[3] | permissive/private[3] | private[3] | private[3] | ||||||
| Bridleway | public_bridleway | designated | designated | designated | no | no | |||
| private[3] | private[3] | ||||||||
| Restricted Byway | restricted_byway | designated | designated | designated | designated | no | |||
| private[3] | |||||||||
| B.O.A.T. | byway_open_to_all_traffic | designated | designated | designated | designated | designated | |||
| - | |||||||||
| Permissive Access | Permissive Footpath | permissive_footpath/- | permissive | no | no | no | no | ||
| private[3] | private[3] | private[3] | private[3] | ||||||
| Permissive Bridleway | permissive_bridleway/- | permissive | permissive | permissive | no | no | |||
| private[3] | private[3] | ||||||||
| Permissive Cycle Path | permissive_cycleway/- | permissive | no | permissive | no | no | |||
| no/private[3] | private[3] | private[3] | private[3] | ||||||
| - | |||||||||
| Pay for Entry Routes | - | customers/no | customers/no | customers/no | private/no | private/no | |||
| legal | Descriptive tags | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| prow_ref | surface | tracktype | name | wheelchair | bridge | ford | note | step_count [4] |
| <val> | asphalt/unpaved/paved/ground/gravel/grass/sand/wood | grade1/grade2/grade3/grade4/grade5 | <text> | yes/- | yes/boardwalk/- | yes/stepping_stones/- | <text> | <val> |
last update:28/11/2019
Northern Ireland
Northern Ireland has very few public rights of way. The majority of access to the countryside is provided on permissive/pay for entry estate basis - in these cases the tagging schema for England and Wales applies. Public Footpaths also exist under the same access permissions as England and Wales, however different access permissions exist for Public Bridleways and Restricted Byways and Byways Open To All Traffic do not exist. The following describes three unique public access cases for Northern Ireland. If you have any questions, comments or feedback, please comment in the discussion tab.
| Physical Property | legal/access permissions | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| highway | designation | foot | horse | bicycle | vehicle | motor_vehicle | |||
|
path/ etc. [2] |
Public Right of Way | Public Bridleway | public_bridleway | designated | designated | no | no | no | |
| permissive/private[3] | private[3] | private[3] | |||||||
| Public Path | - | yes | yes | yes | yes | no | |||
| private[3] | |||||||||
| Carriageway | carriageway | designated | designated | designated | yes | yes | |||
last update:28/11/2019
Access =yes vs =designated
On reviewing the access tag values here, we have updated our guidance to follow the descriptions provided:
- yes - the public has a legal right of access (e.g. it's open access land).
- designated - a Public Right of Way legally 'designated' for use by that transport mode (e.g. a 'public footpath').
We will make this distinction in tag values and use cases clear to those involved in mapping.
Unique Tagging Scenarios
The scenarios below follow feedback from local property teams and offer tagging suggestions. Please feedback any changes to the proposed tags in the discussion.
| Scenario | Examples | Suggested Tagging | Suggested Descriptive Tags |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legal access for walkers/runners exists
(e.g. open access land) but access is temporarily discouraged. [1] |
Route has temporary diversions signs at the beginning and end of a route (e.g. for foot erosion control).
Signage recommends use of another route whilst repairs are ongoing. |
- highway=* (describes the route on the ground)
- foot= no (if route is not accessible or discouraged [2]) - horse=no - bicycle=no - vehicle=no or private (e.g. maintenance vehicles only) - motor_vehicle=no or private (e.g. maintenance vehicles only) |
- surface = *
- tracktype = * - note = * (to describe the individual scenario) * if an obstruction exists, node to indicate barrier=debris |
| Temporary obstructions exist (e.g. tree has fallen, landslip/erosion at coastal zones) which makes the route difficult to traverse. | |||
| Users need to purchase a permit to access a route. | 'Permitted' bridleways on Trust managed land to open areas of an estate to horse riders.
Walking is allowed but cycling is restricted. (e.g. Green way-marked arrows with horseshoe stating 'Permit Holders Only'). |
- highway=* (describes the route on the ground)
- foot=permissive - horse=permit [2] - bicycle=no - vehicle=no or private (e.g. maintenance vehicles only) - motor_vehicle=no or private (e.g. maintenance vehicles only) |
- surface = *
- tracktype = * - note = * (to describe the individual scenario) |
| Access rights unknown. [1] | Path with known access permission (e.g. permissive access for walkers, cyclists) leaves NT managed land. Access on neighbouring land is unclear or not signposted. | - highway=* (describes the route on the ground)
- access=unknown |
[1] Recommend tags are updated in line with the proposed tagging schema as paths become accessible or access rights on neighbouring land is known.
[2] Community feedback: tags are rarely used/undefined - currently reviewing alternatives.
Trails
We're investigating how feasible it is to add National Trust trails into OpenStreetMap as relations. The majority of trails added have been for walkers, however we have added cycle trails and are open to adding other activity trails. We will update this page or create a new organised edit page to detail our approach should we take this further.
Rules-based app
Following our presentation at State of the Map 2019, we are interested in developing a rules-based app to capture, edit and update path geometries and tags in OpenStreetMap. Please contact us via email (below) for more details.
Time frame
In 2019, a pilot study was conducted and involved mapping a small number of properties and monitoring them for changes. It was expected that wide-scale path mapping would begin in early 2020 and continue until Spring 2021. However, the project was paused with the advent of the global coronavirus pandemic in 2020.
In early 2022, the project was re-established and discussion was had with the OSM Board to review the appropriateness of the project and schema. A pilot test was rerun using new desk based methods and feedback was sought from property staff / rangers. The project roll out started in the Winter of 2022 and continued into late 2023. During this time, the location and access permissions of paths were captured at ~90% of the land / properties in our care. Moving forward, we are seeking to analyse the extent and distribution of the path network, as well as the socio-economic value. Further work to enrich this inventory of paths is expected to follow in 2024.
A pilot study is expected in Spring (2024) to understand the scope, appropriateness, timescales and resources required to enrich the inventory of paths. Consideration is being made for capturing a number of path attributes including width, surface type, distance along a trail, gradient and proximity to other features. Other attributes are also being discussed, but due to the scale of data capture, those listed are considered of greatest priority at this stage.
Editors
Our editing team is currently split between:
- A GIS data team mapping paths at properties in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (liaison with local property teams for path and access information).
- Property editors focused on mapping within their property or locally.
Our GIS team consists of the following OSM users:
Dawesy (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)- Olivia Ragone (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
There are also a number of former GIS team members. Their accounts will shortly be merged and run by the active members of the GIS Team:
- hughrt (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
- JasmineRanasinghe (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
- AWMapper (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
- Roshmaps (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
- AJW92 (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
We also have a number of property editors which typically follow the username @NTPropertyNamePaths. Though there are other users:
- NTFormby (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.) - Formby
- MJS2000 (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.) - Purbeck
- NTCotehele (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
OSM Community Meet-ups
- OSMUK Meetup: 29th June 2019.
- SoTM 2019: 22nd September 2019. Link to the talk
- Clumber Park meet up: 19th November 2019 - Path mapping briefing with property rangers, volunteers and two members of the local OSM community.
- OSMUK Meetings: 26th April 2022, 28th July 2022, 25th November 2022, 20th June 2023.
- Ongoing discussion with OSM Data Working Group and former board members.
Tagging Schema Sources
UK Access Provisions: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/UK_access_provisions
Access tag values adhere to table provided here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access, Path controversy - OpenStreetMap Wiki
Additional info on: Further guidance on tagging Public Rights of Way in the United Kingdom, Strava#Data Permission - Allowed for tracing.21
Disused tags
- Due to lack of use, discouraged ways will now be listed as =no.
- Discouraged was previously defined as ‘a legal right of way exists (see =yes) but usage is officially discouraged. Eg. way exists but discouraged for conservation / restoration.
- This does not apply to legal RoW, where access is designated. Instead, a comment will be left in the 'description' field explaining to users any access / safety concerns (eg. conservation / restoration).
- If the discouraged way has a legal designation and is still visible in satellite imagery but does not exist on the ground, routes will be tagged using disused:highway=
Feedback and Contact
To feedback/comment on the project, please use the discussion tab. Please note replies will be delayed.
Notes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Guidance for NT staff/volunteers to use to tag paths consistently.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 List provided is not extensive. Propose to use the tag to describe the route on the ground.
- ↑ 3.00 3.01 3.02 3.03 3.04 3.05 3.06 3.07 3.08 3.09 3.10 3.11 3.12 3.13 3.14 3.15 3.16 3.17 3.18 3.19 3.20 Optional tag value to describe specific use cases.
- ↑ Combine with highway=steps