DWG received a complaint from a landowner asking us to remove a path, Way: 798463670 | OpenStreetMap because it is on his property. The path is marked as access=private but from bing imagery, I can’t tell if the path exists.
I would appreciate it if someone familiar with the area could investigate if this path should be removed or not. The OP also provide us with this pdf map that they think will help.
Thanks,
Clifford
DWG
(Duplicate of Landowner complaint ?)
Unfortunately it is in the forest in the middle of nowhere, so I doubt many people will be familiar with it, and their crossection with set of people visiting this forum is likely to be empty. 
I’m not sure the attached pdf map helps, I guess what the OP probably meant was that there is no official (national, regional or local) road for vehicles there (which is what that map shows with red lines), and that seems correct – if you find peak “Klis” on pdf map (find yellow dot named “Paz” in the vertical middle, but on the eastern third on map side, and find red line just north of it; going around peak “Tupalica”, it indeed stops just before peak “Klis” – but that is way 257662096, which is apparently local road, even if it is mapped as highway=track)
But the problematic path Way: 798463670 | OpenStreetMap which is connected to it is not intended to be a road; according to the mapper it is narrow (0.5m) (“forest”?) path with “ground” surface. So it likely wouldn’t be drawn on that pdf (which is national infrastructure map).
The path is marked as access=private but from bing imagery, I can’t tell if the path exists.
iD and JOSM provide quite more detailed aerial imagery than Bing in aerial imagery named “dgu.hr: Croatia 2021-2022 aerial imagery” (and I have access to even slightly better 2022+2023 as well as 2024 imagery which is not published for OSM use yet).
Here are the screenshots (you probably need to download picture with right click / save image as to see it in full detail, otherwise it will likely be useless):
Also, HOK - Hrvatska Osnovna Karta (national Croatian basemap) seems to show some pathway pretty close to it (deviating ~30m at worst part, and significantly less for most parts)
From those aerials and map, to me there seems to be a passage through the woods pretty close to mapped track (usually within 20m). Definitely western part is nicely visible on 2024 imagery! Eastern part is somewhat harder to tell due to tree canopy in many parts, but visible parts still show some path which follows the line; and while it probably isn’t any official paved footway (much less asphalted road!), it seems to be a reasonable forest path or better (if it still exists; situation could’ve changed since those aerials and maps were made, of course).
could investigate if this path should be removed or not.
As for whether it should be removed or not, that is on DWG to decide. I was under impression mapping those were fine as long as they were appropriately mapped as private?
I hope it helps at least somewhat!
Do you think it should be retagged as highway=path?
As a DWG member, I prefer not to make changes since I’m not very familiar with the area or local laws. In this case, it seems that access=private is appropriate. From looking at the pdf and the area, do you think that any other track or path need to be marked as private?
Uhhh, Way: 798463670 | OpenStreetMap is already tagged as highway=path (and always have been as far as I can tell)?
In this case, it seems that
access=privateis appropriate
Yes, I would agree.
As marking of roads on PDF ends very near to that path (due to municipality boundary – dashed black line), and neighbouring municipality does not seem to have spatial plans published, I cannot say.
Out of caution however, I’ve also marked adjoining path Way: 799419915 | OpenStreetMap as access=private, since it doesn’t go anywhere else but connect to our problematic path 798463670 (which is already marked as private).
Thanks for looking at the ways. I will replay the information to the OP.
