Trail Mapping Project around Mt. Washington

I have been slowly working on properly setting up trails on OpenStreetMap.org and I think I got most of them on the south side of Mt. Washington done ( http://waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=13&lat=44.25213&lon=-71.2935&hill=0.4#routes .)

While working on these trails I noticed two things that I hope folks here could confirm:

1. I think both Crawford Path & Appalachian Trail bypass Mt. Eisenhower and the trail that goes through the summit is Mt. Eisenhower Loop: http://waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=16&lat=44.23921&lon=-71.34759&hill=0.4#routes
2. Similarly, I think Crawford Path & Appalachian Trail bypass Mt. Monroe, and the trail that reaches the summit(s) of Mt. Monroe is Mt. Monroe Loop: http://waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=16&lat=44.25592&lon=-71.31771&hill=0.4#routes

Am I correct on both counts? Tks!

Yes to both. The same applies to the gulfside/AT on Mt Jefferson and Adams both bypass the summit

peakbagger said:

Yes to both. The same applies to the gulfside/AT on Mt Jefferson and Adams both bypass the summit

Click to expand...

Thanks for a quick reply! I fixed Crawford Path for now (it should get updated in an hour or so) and I will take a look at Mt. Jefferson & Adams when I start working on setting up trails on the north side of Mt. Washington.

Likewise for the summit of Mt Clay: the Gulfside misses the summit, the Mt Clay Loop goes over it. It's important to know that the Jewell trail ends on the Gulfside trail and not the Clay summit loop. If the blue trail means the AT/ gulfside, then this (and Jefferson & Adams) are already shown correctly on OpenStreetmap.

I must say, the idea of trail maps without contour lines strikes me as perverse and dangerous.

nartreb said:

Likewise for the summit of Mt Clay: the Gulfside misses the summit, the Mt Clay Loop goes over it. It's important to know that the Jewell trail ends on the Gulfside trail and not the Clay summit loop. If the blue trail means the AT/ gulfside, then this (and Jefferson & Adams) are already shown correctly on OpenStreetmap.

Click to expand...

Thanks for pointing out that Mt. Clay Loop was missing the name on OSM - I just added it and set it up as a trail, so it can be viewed on WaymarkedTrails.org: http://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=16&lat=44.28312&lon=-71.32175&hill=0.4

As it is currently set up in OSM, AT follows Gulfside Trail around Mt. Clay, so it seems to be ok as it is and does not require any changes just like around Mt. Jefferson & Mt. Adams as you already pointed out.

nartreb said:

I must say, the idea of trail maps without contour lines strikes me as perverse and dangerous.

Click to expand...

I agree that lack of contour lines on waymarkedtrail.org is a drawback, but there are other OSM viewers and phone apps that can show them, for example, I often look at "cycle map" layer on OSM web site: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/44.2630/-71.2902&layers=C or I use OsmAnd+ with countour line pluggin on my Android phone. I like waymarkedtrails.org because it allows for download of trail gpx, so I can then look at it in Garmin BaseCamp and it also allows for viewing trail elevation profile - just click on Routes button in lower right corner of the map and then click on some trail name:
http://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/en/?zoom=14&lat=44.28273&lon=-71.29261&hill=0.4#routes

I also often view OSM trails in the cycling mode to make the trails more visible. However, the contour lines are at an annoying large interval (for hiking) and much desirable info (eg political boundaries) is lost. I wish OSM had a hiking mode, or better yet, had a "make your own" custom mode. (Both would be even better... ) The OSM maps are the best hiking maps that I have found for some local conservation areas. (Actually, the OSM trails plotted on a topo are the best... See below.)

One can download the OSM data (click on "Export") for the current view into a .osm file. GPSBabel can then convert the .osm file to a .gpx file. However, there is a lot of extraneous data and I have a perl program which filters the OSM file to retain only the trail info before converting. The GPX file also needs some modification which required a second perl program. The final result (download .osm -> perl program #1 -> GPSBabel -> perl program #2 -> final .gpx track file) is then suitable for plotting in MapSource or NG TOPO!.

I'm happy to share my perl programs, but they often need to be customized for different maps so any recipients will have to have perl programming skills. Both the OSM and the GPX files are XML format files and are pretty easy to look at and design programs to do the necessary processing (in case you want to write your own programs).

I wasn't aware of waymarkedtrails.org--it looks promising. I'll have to take a closer look.

Doug

DougPaul said:

I wasn't aware of waymarkedtrails.org--it looks promising. I'll have to take a closer look.

Doug

Click to expand...

WaymarkedTrails.org would definitely benefit from supporting contour lines. I think they want to use most up-to-date tiles from OpenStreetMap.org which does not have contour lines, however, the technology that they use under the hood (OpenLayers) already supports semi-transparent layers that I think could consist of contour lines.

I'm pretty sure that given some time someone will create a great OSM-based map viewer for hikers. In fact, one of the users on WhiteBlaze.net (Another Kevin) showed me his experimental server that uses OSM data and I was really impressed. I don't want to be responsible for bringing down his server, so I won't post a link, but I am attaching a screenshot that personally I think looks really great:

iAmKrzys said:

WaymarkedTrails.org would definitely benefit from supporting contour lines.

Click to expand...

Agreed--I felt lost as I was looking at some familiar trails...

I think they want to use most up-to-date tiles from OpenStreetMap.org which does not have contour lines, however, the technology that they use under the hood (OpenLayers) already supports semi-transparent layers that I think could consist of contour lines.

Click to expand...

Sounds hopeful.

I'm pretty sure that given some time someone will create a great OSM-based map viewer for hikers. In fact, one of the users on WhiteBlaze.net (Another Kevin) showed me his experimental server that uses OSM data and I was really impressed. I don't want to be responsible for bringing down his server, so I won't post a link, but I am attaching a screenshot that personally I think looks really great:
View attachment 5439

Click to expand...

Looks nice. Similar in some ways, a bit different in other ways to the USFS trail tracks plotted on NG TOPO! and Garmin MapSource Topo US 24K Northeast. (The trails look very similar, the differences are in how they are plotted and the background.)

I know that USGS 100K DLG (Digital Line Graph) topos are (or at least were) available (IIRC, free from the USGS). However, I haven't seen 24K DLGs (but haven't looked very hard). Garmin produces 24K DGL topo products, but I don't know where they get their source data. (NG TOPO! uses DRGs (Digital Raster Graphics, ie scans of the paper maps) of the USGS 24K topos* which are freely available.)
* NG TOPO! appears to use downsampled versions of the USGS DRGs. I have plotted GPS tracks on the full scale USGS DRGs, but the software is inconvenient to use.

Doug

DougPaul said:

I know that USGS 100K DLG (Digital Line Graph) topos are (or at least were) available (IIRC, free from the USGS). However, I haven't seen 24K DLGs (but haven't looked very hard). Garmin produces 24K DGL topo products, but I don't know where they get their source data. (NG TOPO! uses DRGs (Digital Raster Graphics, ie scans of the paper maps) of the USGS 24K topos* which are freely available.)
* NG TOPO! appears to use downsampled versions of the USGS DRGs. I have plotted GPS tracks on the full scale USGS DRGs, but the software is inconvenient to use.

Doug

Click to expand...

If you would like to play with rendering contour lines for use with OSM data (or otherwise) I suspect a good starting point is OSM Wiki article on Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/SRTM

I guess there are two main aspects of customizing an OSM-based map:

1. Building custom tiles that give the map its look and feel. There are a number of tools for building OSM tiles and if you are interested you can start here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Creating_your_own_tiles. One of them is Mapbox Tilemill ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapbox ) Mapbox software is used by alltrails.com. For example, see http://alltrails.com/explore/trail/us/new-hampshire/buttress-trail - I think it looks pretty good both in terms of contour lines and how trails are presented. Clearly AllTrails builds its own tiles as, for example, they don't show Adams Slide Trail that exists on OSM - maybe they filtered it out because the user who marked it did not make his gps traces public.
2. Adding interactive map controls. This is where all the cool bells and whistles come in. Again, there are various toolkits that already can do lots of things: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Deploying_your_own_Slippy_Map. Some of the possible features are really fun like drag-and-drop support for gpx files: http://openlayers.org/en/v3.12.1/examples/drag-and-drop.html.

Additional questions as I keep reviewing and setting up trails:

1. Someone marked Gulfside Trail going all the way to Osgood Junction, but doesn't that end at Madison Hut and the section of the trail from Madison Hut to Osgood Junction is really part of Osgood Trail? http://waymarkedtrails.org/en/relation/5810285?zoom=15&lat=44.32809&lon=-71.27808&hill=0.4#
2. Isn't the path currently marked as Appalachian Trail really a section of Madison Gulf Trail? Please, see on the map: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/55231073

iAmKrzys said:

If you would like to play with rendering contour lines for use with OSM data (or otherwise) I suspect a good starting point is OSM Wiki article on Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/SRTM

Click to expand...

Yes, I am aware of the SRTM data. It is available in 2 resolutions: 30 meter and 90 meter, both of which are a bit coarse for high-resolution topos.

I guess there are two main aspects of customizing an OSM-based map:

1. Building custom tiles that give the map its look and feel. There are a number of tools for building OSM tiles and if you are interested you can start here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Creating_your_own_tiles. One of them is Mapbox Tilemill ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapbox ) Mapbox software is used by alltrails.com. For example, see http://alltrails.com/explore/trail/us/new-hampshire/buttress-trail - I think it looks pretty good both in terms of contour lines and how trails are presented. Clearly AllTrails builds its own tiles as, for example, they don't show Adams Slide Trail that exists on OSM - maybe they filtered it out because the user who marked it did not make his gps traces public.
2. Adding interactive map controls. This is where all the cool bells and whistles come in. Again, there are various toolkits that already can do lots of things: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Deploying_your_own_Slippy_Map. Some of the possible features are really fun like drag-and-drop support for gpx files: http://openlayers.org/en/v3.12.1/examples/drag-and-drop.html.

Click to expand...

Thanks--I think I'll pass on trying to make my own for the moment, but I'll keep your suggestions in mind if I decide to give it a try.

Perhaps the Adams Slide Trail is not shown because it has been abandoned. (I hiked it back when it was still official.) Also I've noticed that OSM trails cross private land in contrast to many local official town maps which only show the trails on conservation land leaving annoying gaps. Perhaps AllTrails is being similarly more selective than OSM.

Doug

I think I am pretty much done with setting up trails on OpenStreetMap.org on the northern side of Presidential Range: http://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=13!44.3401!-71.293

There are some things that are still missing but most of the trails should be there. Feel free to point out any issues to me as you spot them. Here is a couple that I noted as I worked through the map:

1. I couldn't tell with certainty how exactly Randolph Path begins, so I did not set it up from it's beginning
2. There was no footpath marked for a large chunk of Pine Link
3. Watson Path is missing a segment
4. Kelton Trail should connect to The Brookside but it only comes close
5. Intersection of Randolph Path and Valley Way does not look quite right
6. Many trails don't have publicly available gps traces, so it is hard gauge the level of trust / accuracy