New Onx app.

[Irrelevant]

Nice little write up in Outside on the new app. I haven't tried it. I hope it's also available as a layer in the hunt app.
https://www.outsideonline.com/2397195/onx-offroad-app

 

[OcmulgeeOgre]

Android only for now so that’s likely why they are not publicizing it much.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Part of me loves what onX has done and part of me hates it... depends on if the 30 year old who wants everyone to have the opportunity to experience our public lands or the 5yr old who doesn’t wanna share is driving the ship.

 

[Coop]

Just checked it out and I like it a lot. Not sure I would pay for it, though as you can get the same info on the USDA site with a little bit of digging (at least for MT). If they included roads that are open/closed on BLM then I would do it in a heartbeat. Still a nice tool to have.

 

[Ben Sellers]

Doesn’t look like it’s available for IPhones yet. I sure hope it’s not an extra cost above the 50 state price.

 

[come2elmo]

There is the Colorado trail explorer app that has this layer as well. Albeit only Colorado

 

[madtom]

Given the errors they’ve had with forest and county roads in the past, I see this being ugly.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Given the errors they’ve had with forest and county roads in the past, I see this being ugly.

Looks like the goal is to crowd source current road conditions which I assume would give them a frame work to capture some of the access granularity, they are currently missing.

For instance, they could make verified county GIS professionals authoritative sources with the ability to mark roads as open or closed to public access.

 

[gutshootem]

What is the cost? Looks like you have to download the app in the play store before they'll give a price.

 

[Twolftg]

When did this change occur? Doesnt seem that different from what the app has been. I guess I never tried to search by vehicle or saw that function but the roads showed when they opened if you clicked on them.

 

[WapitiBob]

It’s a separate app, $30 year.
Looks like the mvum data over a different topo for non hunters. Probably a good idea to help grow the business.

 

[lastlight]

I remember that one time when there used to be just one secret

 

[gutshootem]

It’s a separate app, $30 year.
Looks like the mvum data over a different topo for non hunters. Probably a good idea to help grow the business.

Thanks

 

[Zach]

It’s a separate app, $30 year.
Looks like the mvum data over a different topo for non hunters. Probably a good idea to help grow the business.

If it catches on like other things in nature hiking arena, that portion of the business will surpass the hunters portion.

 

[rideold]

Looks like the goal is to crowd source current road conditions which I assume would give them a frame work to capture some of the access granularity, they are currently missing.

For instance, they could make verified county GIS professionals authoritative sources with the ability to mark roads as open or closed to public access.

My guess is that won't happen. I was in a position partenering with Google to do a similar thing. It didn't go well in the end. Mist municipal and county GIS folks I know don't have the time. Now of OnX set themselves up to consume API access to open data that would be super useful for areas where the local data is live-ish.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

My guess is that won't happen. I was in a position partenering with Google to do a similar thing. It didn't go well in the end. Mist municipal and county GIS folks I know don't have the time. Now of OnX set themselves up to consume API access to open data that would be super useful for areas where the local data is live-ish.

The article made it seem like crowd sourcing... I was just speculating about what they could try and do... I agree with you though about the difficulties in getting local players involved. I have set up editable layers on my companies mobile application, most attribute data for Wells, our field guys populate everything from the field. The systems works well so I assume it’s scalable... I think something like Ways for dirt roads is the final goal.

 

[rideold]

The article made it seem like crowd sourcing... I was just speculating about what they could try and do... I agree with you though about the difficulties in getting local players involved. I have set up editable layers on my companies mobile application, most attribute data for Wells, our field guys populate everything from the field. The systems works well so I assume it’s scalable... I think something like Ways for dirt roads is the final goal.

Yep. That's the way to do it. The devil is in the details for sure. Either way, it's a great idea for a system and it would be neat to see it work. For me the crowdsource data is useful in that if an area had no input then that's where I want to go instead of the place that has 1,000 points of input!

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

Yep. That's the way to do it. The devil is in the details for sure. Either way, it's a great idea for a system and it would be neat to see it work. For me the crowdsource data is useful in that if an area had no input then that's where I want to go instead of the place that has 1,000 points of input!

Lol my thoughts exactly... when picking hikes I often google a trail-head and if I find a lot of info I toss it and look for something else.

 

[Nameless Range]

Very cool, but I would still be cautious. For example: The Beaverhead-Deerlodge NF still does not have a travel plan. I know for a fact that this makes enforcement dang near impossible and authoritative sources to reference are a gray area. There's a tendency to apply an overconfidence to these datasets.

 

[rideold]

Very cool, but I would still be cautious. For example: The Beaverhead-Deerlodge NF still does not have a travel plan. I know for a fact that this makes enforcement dang near impossible and authoritative sources to reference are a gray area. There's a tendency to apply an overconfidence to these datasets.

Really good point. I think most people apply way more confidence in data than is prudent (on a daily basis)! I've worked in the spatial sciences industry for a long time and it didn't take me long to understand that all data we look at is a model with a margin of error. Being a model it is not the same as what's really on the ground. It can't be and a smart person won't expect it to be. In today's hyper-connected instant answer world I think people forget that.