Methodology

How records are handled

Published does not mean trusted. Every place on the map is useful to discover; the confidence tier tells you how much to rely on it before travelling. Scraped listings start unverified. Visits, photos, and official sources raise confidence — never in one jump from scrape to field-checked. We would rather show you an honest 'not sure yet' than a confident guess.

Public confidence

What each tier means

On the map you will see one of three public tiers. The finer labels below explain what sits inside each tier and what it means for a visit.

Unverified

Useful leads — noticed online, mapped from listings, aging, or disputed. Check before you travel.

  • Noticed: Listed online or reported — not checked on the ground.
  • On the map: Plausible location and context — still not field-verified.
  • Aging record: Was reliable once; now aging — verify before you travel.
  • Disputed: Something important is disputed or unconfirmed.

Evidence-backed

Photos, named sources, or field clues support the record — still worth confirming access and species.

  • Source linked: Named official or register source attached.
  • Seen: Backed by field clues, photos, or corroborating sources.
  • Photographed: Approved photo evidence supports the record.
  • Recently visited: Someone reported a visit — details may still need checking.

Field-checked

Confirmed on the ground by us, a partner, or a mapping walk.

  • Checked: A person has stood at the site and confirmed the trees and access.

Truth-seeking

How we strengthen records

A core part of our methodology is moving public candidates toward stronger records. We cross-reference claims against official estate publications, arboreta records, photos, repeated source clues, and trusted field observations when those signals exist.

  • Measurements: We treat historic heights or girths as snapshots, not permanent facts.
  • Species confirmation: Coast redwoods and giant sequoias are frequently confused in casual records. Visual clues — like bark texture or foliage shape — help move a claim from unverified toward field-checked.

Review

How review stays useful

Sources are separated on purpose

Official visitor information, reference material, field notes, and unresolved claims do different jobs. Among the Redwoods keeps those roles distinct so a visitor can tell what supports access, identity, or wider background.

Access is treated separately from species

A place can be real and still need care before a visit. Access notes, ticketing, opening, and route context are surfaced independently because trip planning depends on them.

Corrections keep records honest

Missing sources, stale access details, new photos, and field sightings all help sharpen the public record. Reviewed updates matter as much as the first listing.

Data

Data use and licensing

Among the Redwoods publishes place records for public reference with source attribution on each record. We do not yet publish the dataset under a formal open-data licence (such as ODbL or CC BY). Partner and contributor data stays attributed; ask before reusing bulk exports.