These changes are just vandalism, we have tried to enter a dialogue with you but so far have not heard anything in response! See;- osm.wiki/Vandalism
If you object to the mapping of public footpaths over a golf course then there is a legal process to have them diverted rather than deleting someone's work.

This is just plain ridiculous; you are acting as a vandal!

I agree.and changing paths which are public footpaths as noted in https://www.mapthepaths.org.uk/
and https://apps1.wdm.co.uk/Pipcumbriahms/map.aspx?cg=PROW
is irresponsible at best and could have much worse consequences.
There is extensive notes on how golf courses should be mapped in leisure=golf_course. To convert a whole beach ino a golf bunker is ridiculous. As was changing Dunnerholme Cottages into offices. Please seek help!

Is this really an abandoned line? I was under the impression that this had always been a single line. So what is the purpose of this?

Your suggestion sounds like a agreeable compromise, thanks I'll add demolished to the tags and put a photo in geograph.org next time I go past. Interestingly Google streetview still shows it as it was in 2006-2010, gives an indication of how often its updated. https://earth.google.com/web/@54.15213186,-3.22891386,28.22658539a,0d,60y,355.27199315h,85.93947865t,0r/data=IhoKFlpkS2pQb25XUUdZeVZGYnBIbjJwNFEQAg

The only signs are the overgrown tracks, All buildings have been removed. The area is still fenced off though; I can send you a photo? Is it possible to put a photo or link in this discussion?. It closed in about 2015; given how much the has reverted to nature I'm inclined to delete it completely. Unlike old abandoned railways or quarries which leave a near permanent mark on the lanscape this area would not be noticed at all if you didnt know it was there!

I'm pleased that you are now satisfied. I will probably be walking that area again in a few days I'll try to remember to do a gps trace and see how the height of the two ends of Grey Crags compare. This was certainly more interesting than the rather boring activity of adding houses to the N end of Askham, or adding walls hedges and farmland, which I have been doing recently. I'm also surprised that this is a Marilyn as I said earlier because the drop to the S is only about 20 to 30 m. because of Cocklakes, far less the the required 150 m.

With a stated height of 334 m.

I'm surprised that Grey Crags qualifies as a Marilyn.

Yes the photos at SK2583 are all of the cairn at Grey Crags, amazing how much it varies. I'm reluctant to change the name, we locals do all refer to Grey Crags.as a part of Kirkby Moor; the whole moor from the A5092 to Bank House Moor in the S. It's quite surprising; I had always been told by other locals that Shooting House Hill to the S. was the highest point at 332 m. on Kirkby Moor. I never questioned it. However following this investigation I now think that Grey Crags is slightly higher. An early OS 6 in.map (1842-1953) records a spot height of 1092 ft.(332.8 m.). Probably like you, because Grey Crags has such a long rounded flattish top I never thought of its height. The views are certainly better from Shooting House Hill.

It is also (probably) the highest point on Kirkby Moor, compared to Cocklakes I km to the S which is a much more pointy peak.

I have visited this hill several times (I live close by at Friars Ground) it is a very small hill with a long flat gently rounded top. It is the highest point within several kilometres; it is wholly enclosed by the 330 m. contour line. It is easily higher and more distinctive as a peak than the peak of Keldray Moor to the east which has a spot height of 299 m and is a relatively flat plateau.. I have conferred with other Kirkby locals who walk the moor regularly and they agree with me. You are correct, all of the locals refer to the moor S of the A5092 as Kirkby Moor sometimes the S end is referred to as The Parks for obvious reasons. I have never heard anyone refer to it as Lowick High Common which would be confused with Lowick Common to the E. The moor to the N of the A5092 is referred to as Gawthwaite moor of simply Burney.

I agree, re streams vs ditches, however I thought the vast number of streams I changed to ditches were field or road drainage; If I've got some wrong I'm sorry, please feel free to revert, if you think iy is required.

I think the easiest / simplest way is is just map the area tag as clearcut and scrub or heath, then when its replanted and the trees start to grow in a few years remove the area.

Having read through the discussion on man_made=clearcut my thoughts are that logged areas need to be mapped, somehow. Unlike pasture crops which can change annually, clear cut areas last quite a long time, but they do need to be updated over several years. A good example is Kirkby Park Wood near Grizebeck which I will be updating again soon.osm.org/edit#map=16/54.2676/-3.1708. See the difference between this years Bing aerial and the older Esri images.

Combining the tag natural=scrub with the clear cut gives a better colour in the standard carto, I think, what are your thoughts?

Thanks it seems a much better way of describing whats actually happening on the ground. I'll try it out and see how it looks.

What is happening here? The residential area is covering up the wood. ( See also Orchard head to the S). Wreaks End Farm to the NW is the way it used to be.

Hi Rogerc, While I was checking the changeset you mentioned earlier, I came acroos this issue with the footpath you added (way/804024496) on Lowick Common, its flagged as a footpath crossing a stream, its quite a while since I was there and I would assume that they would be connected with a ford, but since you walked the path you would know definitely so I havent fixed it..

Thanks for fixing the the boundaries concerned, I wasn't aware that a small discrepancy in the alignment of farmland with a wall or hedge would cause a problem., I'll try to do better!. Can you give me an example of where it causes a problem?