Your edit on this is wrong. There is no road here. It is either construction, or abandoned.

I think the local name is just BLM land. As in, I'm camped on the other side of Poncha Pass on the BLM land, or camped along CR 240 on BLM land. Is an acronym acceptable in loc_name? It isn't critical, I've modified my mkgmap scripts to handle the full spelled out name, (altho when someone changes the case or has a typo its broken again).
I never knew about the field offices until diving into it. I don't think most folks know about the BLM field offices, It isn't as well known as the distinct Nat Forests, nor is it as important to know.
As far as the allotment name and number, that's too detailed, & I don't have any interest in going to that level of detail, nor do I see any reason too. That would be a huge amount of work and virtually no value added.

I agree, the name is awkward. That's what the BLM calls it. https://blm-egis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=59bfb9b9406d4a409e2f510bda9e409f . Maybe 'region' or something like that make more sense. Open to suggestions

Andy T did me a favor by reverting the deletion. I read the osm us & osm tagging list regularly. There was not considerable discussion on either of those forums. There are too many scattered OSM forums to keep up with. Sorry to be cranky, but I see too much being messed up by remote & satellite mappers .

I think it's unfortunate that you took the acronym BLM out of the name, and operator fields. It was added to operator by me, I'm local to that area, It was added to the the name by another westerner. You've stomped on the tags from locals and added fluff based on some new wiki page that hasn't been approved or voted on and is an over-complicated convoluted mess.

Do you really think that a trail crossing a dry gulch needs a ford tag?

Tom, please revert your deletions!

Tom, It looks like you cleaned up a bunch of boundaries that were not noise. I put a lot of work into importing the BLM boundaries.

You might want to hold up on retagging trunk to primary. See osm.wiki/United_States/Highway_classification

Sorry, I didn't need to be so blunt. The road is CR 302, way/38164034 & several adjacent. Sometimes it is difficult to determine the surface from imagery. When it comes to paved vs unpaved, no information is better than wrong information.

Some of the roads you tagged as asphalt are unpaved. Please be more careful with imagery edits.

Are you sure these service roads are private? Are they private, but open to the public? example: way/896817665. This area is heavily used by dirt bikes.

Why did you change this to private? I was just there. No signs, and plenty of people hiking or biking.

Why did you remove the smoothness tag on way/98779809?

mtbgreg, access=no, foot=yes is a contradiction isn't it?

I don't want to change your edits without discussion, but I don't think the roads in Durango that you upgraded to Primary, should be primary. Secondary at best. E College, E 8th, Valdez Way.

Great! I've ridden past these trails many times, but couldn't remember which was which. A lot of maps, including USGS online, have it the other way.

What is your source for the names of these trails?

Why did you create a route relation for these trails?

Why did you create a route relation for these trails?