Add access tags "Sensitive" and "Limited". And mark in menu/list similar as for closed crags

[FredrikEckardt]

What you expected:

Access tags - I refer to the tags in the list under "legality" (Maybe the header also could be changed to access situation or similar.

• Add access tags "Sensitive" and "Limited"
• Add alert in lists and menus, similar to the red one for "Closed".

Example of when I would like to tag the crag access situation as "Sensitive":

• Not banned, but landowner dont like that we climb.
• Conflict between climbers and people who live near the crag.
• Complaints and risk of closure.
• Climbers have not behaved and followed the rules, risk of ban. (Noice, camping, dogs, parking, fires, bolting when not allowed ... )

Example of when I would like to tag a crag access as "Limited"

• Crag closed part of the year, example for bird nesting, but open part of the year.
• Some sectors or parts of the walls have been closed, but some are still open.
• Climbing not allowed during parts of the day.

[scd]

Can we have a bit of a community discussion about the best way to do this. In particular we already have

• an access field which propagates down so any sensitive access issues can be described and climbers should read and consider what is written in the access field.

• warning system which is really good at telling the community about a change in conditions that is really important.

My fear is that we implement a sensitive crag and suddenly 50% of the worlds crags are sensitive.

I think there is a case for putting in a tag for it's not formally closed but don't climb here anyway because ongoing access is at risk. Again my fear is that individuals who don't want too many climbers at their local crags will over use this flag. Any change like this would have to be driven at the climbing advocacy group level.

So maybe if the area access was being properly managed by an advocacy group and it made it easy for them to communicate to the community then this is feature we need.

[FredrikEckardt]

@scd your thoughts about "sensitive access situation" are very relevant. I agree, at least partly.

For me "sensitive" would mean something like, that climbing is not banned, but keep a low profile and make sure you follow all instructions of what is allowed and not. (Parking, dogs, fire ..)

And, i guess a sensitive access situation can be handled as follow:

• If "just sensitive" > Use the access field and describe the situation and why sensitive.
• If "very sensitive" > Use warning and describe the situation in access field and in the warning text.

Suggestion was inspired by features on 27crags, https://stkf.se/accessinfo/ and http://access.bergsport.se/ (The two later in Swedish, but I think you understand what I mean if you use google translate).

What do you think about "limited", or something similar. For example, if crag only open parts of the year due to bird nesting or, if part of the crag / sectors has been closed?

[scd]

It is a good idea doing the use case.

Only open part of the year we should use a warning to indicate the change of status and the closed flag during the time that it is closed. There is an idea to put dates on closed flag to reduce the admin overhead of managing this.

If part of the sectors are closed then a warning on the closed route(s), or maybe a restructure so that the closed section is documented in it's own area.

There was definitely a case with the great Grampians debate where it would have been helpful to have a restricted access flag which shows up on the maps. There are officially areas that are clearly closed with big fines and there are special protection areas. There was conflicting advice in the climbing community whether the special protection areas were legal closures, but what was clear was that climbers should not be climbing in the special protection areas. It would have been helpful to have the special protection areas appear visually on the map.

So yes I think you are right that there is a need for a second flag to appear on the map with a different color.

My personal view here is that all crags are sensitive and should be treated with respect. Climbers should always read the access notes and make sure the desired culture is adhered to in the peer groups.

Before we commit to any implementation I still want to collect more information about this. In particular I would like to hear what advocacy groups want to help them manage access.

[lordyavin]

Similar to #3295 and there is a pending todo list in #1345. Just for the record.

[FredrikEckardt]

A feature to allow to set closed and open date periods, and that the closed flag activated based on this would be great. That would save a lot of admin.

[rouletout]

So from what I read here the suggestion is to cover the first part of the issue with a new tag called "At risk" or similar while the second part is covered using enhancements of the existing warning system, correct?

[FredrikEckardt]

@rouletout, Yes, correct!