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.

Timeline

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. We then sought to analyse the extent and distribution of the path network, as well as the socio-economic value.

Further work to enrich our paths inventory was expected to follow in the next round of data capture (in 2025), which focused on promoted walking trails.

A pilot study was completed in Spring/Summer 2024 to understand the scope, appropriateness, timescales and resources required to enrich the inventory of paths. Consideration was made for capturing a number of path attributes including width, surface type, distance along a trail, gradient and proximity to other features. Other attributes (approx. ~250 of them) were also discussed, but due to the potential scale of data capture that this would require, we opted to focus on attributes of greatest priority at this stage.

Pilot test sites include: Killerton, Attingham Park, Borrowdale, Belfast Area (Divis and the Black Mountains), White Cliffs and Gower. These properties represent each region in which we care for land / nature / heritage, and the range of properties within the National Trust's portfolio.

Work to develop the inventory into trail information for our visitors involves significant data capture, which began in Spring 2025 and is expected to finish in Spring 2026.

Paths Proposal (2019-2023)

SoTM 2019 presentation: https://media.ccc.de/v/sotm2019-1381-national-trust-managing-a-path-inventory-in-osm-towards-an-open-paths-standard-in-osm-for-the-uk

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.

Ongoing Data Monitoring (2022-present)

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.

Trails Proposal (2024-2025)

We're investigating how feasible it is to add National Trust trails into OpenStreetMap as relations. The majority of trails added will be for walkers. However cycle, equestrian, running and mountain biking trails are included in the proposed scope for future work and we are open to adding other activities.

We propose that we would:

• Review existing data on trails intersecting National Trust managed land.
• Utilise our ranger network/property based staff for on-the-ground knowledge to verify the data.
• Create any relations (trails) which do not exist in OSM, and split / amend / update any existing paths / trail locations where necessary.
• Tag path & trail information consistently using the guidance, updating existing tags if necessary (e.g. if the surface type is not tagged appropriately).

Path / Trail information that we hope to capture includes: name=, route=, operator=, tourism=, start and end points (from=, via=, to=), distance=, duration=, surface=, smoothness=, incline= (maximum up and downslope gradients), width= (at narrowest points), dog=, website=, steps=, benches, barriers (gates, fords, stepping stones, stiles, cattle grids) and attractions (including viewpoints).

In the long term, we also hope to add facilities (toilets, changing places, car parks, disabled parking, pubs, shops etc) to the national dataset.

Once captured in OSM, we hope to use a standardised schema to share our trail network as open data / with a publishing partner and / or on our National Trust website. Early conversations are being had with the Open Data Institute about reinvigorating the Open Active route specification as a method of data sharing, and we are looking to establish a working group for this purpose.

Trail Mapping (2025-2026)

In 2024, we pilot tested how feasible it would be to add National Trust promoted trails into OSM. We used relations, and focused our scope to walking trails at 6 of the places we care for; White Cliffs (London & South East region), Killerton (South West), Borrowdale (North), Gower (Wales), Divis and the Black Mountains / Belfast Area (Northern Ireland) and Attingham Park (Midlands and the East of England). The pilot properties were chosen for their regional spread, and differences in physicality.

Lessons learned and research with wider organisations in the industry has since resulted in changes to which tags we will prioritise as part of the data capture process for 2025-2026. In particular, we will be looking to add more attractions (tourism=viewpoints/attraction/information), amenities (amenity=cafe/parking/toilets/pub/bench and leisure=picnic_table) and barriers (barrier=stile/turnstile/gate/kissing_gate/swing_gate/bar/cattle_grid/bollard) to the relations. We will, however, be looking to capture incline information outside of OSM due to difficulties faced when tagging ways with positive / negative incline values, where relations are present in both directions.

With the above in mind, we are now running a data capture window from April 2025-January 2026, with the aim of capturing physical attributes of our promoted walking trails at all of the places we care for. Mulit-use trails that include walking will also be included in the scope of this round of data capture. However cycle, equestrian, running and mountain biking trails will be considered for future work. We are also open to adding other activities and would welcome feedback on this topic. Those trails that go off NT land will also be included in the scope of this work and we will endeavour to tag the operator as appropriate.

We will be are prioritising those properties that have a greater density of paths & trails first, and those that are viewed as holding most potential for supporting our charitable aims of 'Ending Unequal Access' and restoring 30 by 30. A team of Assistant GIS Data Officers have also been recruited to help capture this data, with one based in each region. Usernames of NT Editors are listed below. The primary app used for data collection will be Vespucci, largely due to the range of editing functionality that it provides - though we reviewed the use of other apps including StreetComplete, Field Maps, Path Surveyor, JOSM, Survey123. Throughout the data capture window, however, we will be regularly logging in to the iD Editor to view feedback / changeset comments made by other users more easily. Regardless, we will endeavour to respond to each of these within a week of receiving feedback. Though please note that our team are often in locations with poor signal / wifi connectivity.

Trail Tagging Guidance

England, Wales & Northern Ireland

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. If you have any questions, comments or feedback, please comment in the discussion tab.

Tagging Guidelines

Trail Attribute	OSM Tag	Value to Be Added to Relation	Essential / Optional
Feature Type	type	route	Essential
Trail Type	route	foot / hiking / bicycle	Essential
Trail Name	name	[Trail Name, Property Name]	Essential
Operator	operator	National Trust	Essential
Network Class	network	Local / Regional / National / International	Optional
Network Type	network:type	lwn / lcn / rwn / rcn / nwn / ncn / iwn / icn	Optional
Start Point	from	[Postal Address;Grid Reference]	Essential
End Point	to	[Postal Address;Grid Reference]	Essential
Locations on Route / Destinations	via	[Place Name. eg. London]	Optional
Trail Description and / or Additional Notes	description	[Free Text Field]	Essential
Distance along trail (including excursions, but not alternative routes)	distance	[distance in kilometers, format to 1 decimal place eg. 2.1]	Essential
Time Required To Navigate Trail (including excursions, but not alternative routes)	duration	[time, format to hh:mm and rounded to the nearest 15mins if under one hour. eg. 00:15 or 01:30-02:00]	Essential
Circular Route / Not	roundtrip	yes / no	Essential
Web Article	website	[URL link]	Optional
Tourism Feature	tourism	yes	Essential
Dog Access	dog	yes / no / leashed / unleashed	Optional
Colour Associated With The Trail (typically on waymarkers or trail name)	colour	red / blue / black / green etc	Optional
Relation Member Attribute	OSM Tag	Value to Be Added To Members of the Relation
Role of Relation	role	alternative / excursion / parking	Essential (if appropriate)
Path Attribute	OSM Tag	Value to Be Added To Ways
Surface Material	surface	compacted / asphalt / grass / dirt / mud / sett etc.	Essential
Surface Smoothness	smoothness	excellent / very_good / good / intermediate / bad / very_bad / horrible / very_horrible / impassable (NB: We recognise the subjectivity of the smoothness values and are mapping using the criteria given in the value descriptions. Eg. <2cm cracks etc. Our ambition is to see OSM's smoothness values reflect the objectivity seen in the criteria for each value).	Essential
Narrowest Width / Pinch Point	width	[width in meters, format to 2 decimal places eg. 0.90]	Essential
Number of Steps	step_count	[Numerical value to 0 decimal places. eg. 5]	Essential (if appropriate)
Dog Access	dog	yes / no / leashed / unleashed	Optional
Additional Notes	description	[Free text field]	Optional
Barrier Attribute	OSM Tag	Value to Be Added To Barriers
Barrier Type	barrier bridge highway	gate / kissing_gate / swing_gate / stile / cattle_grid / bollard etc. yes / boardwalk steps	Essential
Narrowest Width	width	[width in meters, format to 2 decimal places eg. 0.90]	Essential
Greatest Height (largely on steps)	height	[height in meters, format to 2 decimal places eg. 0.25]	Essential (if appropriate)
Number of Steps	step_count	[Numerical value to 0 decimal places. eg. 5]	Essential (if appropriate)
Material	material	wood / stone / metal / aluminum etc	Optional
Surface Material	surface	compacted / asphalt / grass / dirt / mud / sett / wood etc.	Essential (if appropriate)
Surface Smoothness	smoothness	excellent / very_good / good / intermediate / bad / very_bad / horrible / very_horrible / impassable (NB: We recognise the subjectivity of the smoothness values and are mapping using the criteria given in the value descriptions. Eg. <2cm cracks etc. Our ambition is to see OSM's smoothness values reflect the objectivity seen in the criteria for each value).	Essential (if appropriate)
Additional Notes	description	[Free text field]	Optional
Amenity Attribute	OSM Tag	Value to Be Added to Amenities
Feature Type	amenity leisure	bench / cafe / pub / parking / toilets picnic_bench	Essential
Material	material	wood / stone / metal / aluminium etc	Optional
Surface Material	surface	compacted / asphalt / grass / dirt / mud / sett etc.	Essential (if appropriate)
Surface Smoothness	smoothness	excellent / very_good / good / intermediate / bad / very_bad / horrible / very_horrible / impassable (NB: We recognise the subjectivity of the smoothness values and are mapping using the criteria given in the value descriptions. Eg. <2cm cracks etc. Our ambition is to see OSM's smoothness values reflect the objectivity seen in the criteria for each value).	Essential (if appropriate)
Back Rest (largely on benches)	backrest	yes / no	Optional
Arm Rest (largely on benches)	armrest	yes / no	Optional
Additional Notes	description	[Free Text Field]	Optional
Attraction Attribute	OSM Tag	Value to Be Added to Attractions
Feature Type	tourism	attraction	Essential
Name of Attraction	name	[Free Text Field]	Essential
Description and / or Additional Notes	description	[Free Text Field]	Optional

Path Tagging Guidance

PDF copy of the paths schema handout from OSMUK Community Meetup on 26/6/19

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.

Tagging Guidelines

Physical Property		legal/access permissions
highway				designation	foot	horse	bicycle	vehicle	motor_vehicle
footway/ bridleway/ cycleway/ track/ path/ service/ steps/ etc. .		Public Right of Way	Footpath	public_footpath	designated	no	no	no	no
						permissive/private	permissive/private	private	private
			Bridleway	public_bridleway	designated	designated	designated	no	no
								private	private
			Restricted Byway	restricted_byway	designated	designated	designated	designated	no
									private
			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	private	private	private
			Permissive Bridleway	permissive_bridleway/-	permissive	permissive	permissive	no	no
								private	private
			Permissive Cycle Path	permissive_cycleway/-	permissive	no	permissive	no	no
					no/private	private		private	private
		-
		Pay for Entry Routes	-		customers/no	customers/no	customers/no	private/no	private/no
		Open Access Land	-		yes	-

Optional Extras

legal	Descriptive tags
prow_ref	surface	tracktype	name	wheelchair	bridge	ford	note	step_count
<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.

Tagging Guidelines (Unique NI Cases)

Physical Property		legal/access permissions
highway				designation	foot	horse	bicycle	vehicle	motor_vehicle
footway/ bridleway/ cycleway/ track/ path/ service/ steps/ etc.		Public Right of Way	Public Bridleway	public_bridleway	designated	designated	no	no	no
							permissive/private	private	private
			Public Path	-	yes	yes	yes	yes	no
									private
			Carriageway	carriageway	designated	designated	designated	yes	yes

Disused Tags

• Due to the 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. for conservation / restoration purposes
• This does not apply to legal rights of way, where access is designated. Instead, a comment will be left in the description field explaining to users any access / safety concerns
• 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=

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

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

Route Relations: Relation:route - OpenStreetMap Wiki

Additional info on: Further guidance on tagging Public Rights of Way in the United Kingdom, Strava#Data Permission - Allowed for tracing.21

OSM Community Engagement

Slides from OSMUK Community Meetup on 26/06/2019

• 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.
• Ongoing meetings with OSMUK representatives & board members: 26th April 2022, 28th July 2022, 25th November 2022, 20th June 2023, 10th June 2024.
• Ongoing discussion with OSM Data Working Group.

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:

• NTTrailsLSE (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
• NTTrailsMEE (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
• NTTrailsSW (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
• NTTrailsWLS (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
• NTTrailsNTH (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
• NTGISData (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.)
• Dawesy (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:

• 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.), hughrt (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.),

We also have a number of property editors which typically follow the username @NTPropertyNamePaths.

Feedback and Contact

To feedback/comment on the project, please use the discussion tab. Please note, we will endeavour to reply as soon as we can.