Author Topic: Clinching decommissioned US highways  (Read 203 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mapcat

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 889
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 12:39:12 pm
Clinching decommissioned US highways
« on: July 30, 2019, 06:23:58 pm »
I'm thinking about keeping track of clinches for decommissioned US highways, and wonder if anyone else has ever attempted this. Earlier this summer I drove the length of NY 104 (excluding the part east of I-81, which AFAIK was never part of US 104) and thought about whether I ought to consider US 104 clinched as a result. Some questions arose:
  • Should it matter how long the highway was signed as a US highway?
  • Should it matter when the highway was decommissioned? Maybe limit it to those that existed during my lifetime?
  • What routing should I use: the current routing of the route(s) that replaced it, or the actual path the US highway took immediately before its demise?
Please note that I am not suggesting that decommissioned US highways be tracked in TM in any way.

Any thoughts?
Clinched:

Offline yakra

  • TM Collaborator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2245
  • Last Login:October 18, 2019, 03:13:53 pm
Re: Clinching decommissioned US highways
« Reply #1 on: July 30, 2019, 09:33:50 pm »
Quote
Should it matter how long the highway was signed as a US highway?
I wouldn't think so. I like the idea of being able to grab more esoteric routes like US 122.

Quote
Should it matter when the highway was decommissioned? Maybe limit it to those that existed during my lifetime?
In my case, that'd only give me a list of 8 or 9 routes, assuming routes that were decommissioned in their entirety (vice, say, US91). If I were a faster-paced traveler determined to go out and get all these, it may not keep me busy very long.
Limiting the decommissioning date, or lifetime of the route, could make for a smaller more manageable ToDo list. Once it's done, relax the standards, and see where there is to go next.

Quote
What routing should I use: the current routing of the route(s) that replaced it,
Not IMO. Changes could be major. Or beyond the scope of what the original US route was (EG NY104). Successor routes will probably be numbered routes clinchable in their own right.
OTOH, this didn't bother me one bit when I followed the Lincoln Highway corridor. I was content to take US30Bus, US30 proper across much of OH, and eventually just I-80 across the west. I clinched The Route That Eric Took From Portland to San Francisco in 2006 and am mighty pleased with that, and will milk it for all the bragging rights it's worth. No point getting hung up on regrets. :)

Quote
or the actual path the US highway took immediately before its demise?
That's one possibility. Another is the route it took when it was at its greatest historical length.
Then, there are the routes that had significant relocations at the end, moving from one city to a completely different one.
If you're really ambitious, you could go for all the old alignments. Every last oxbow. Gotta catch`em all!

Whatever gives the most enjoyment for the person doing the clinching, of course.

Offline osu-lsu

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 11:19:26 pm
Re: Clinching decommissioned US highways
« Reply #2 on: July 30, 2019, 10:51:00 pm »
Have you tried compiling the various routings for US 23 & 33 through Columbus over the years?