Unless "I have to buy" is a mistranslation.
Seems easy and efficient. You don’t need to charge mandatory admission and collect money (like is done in the US) you just sell an optional map in local stores. Makes sense.
I have hiked the PCT without seeing another human for a week. Other western trails are more desolate.
Also backcountry trails are rarely marked, except at some trailheads. The government maps were mostly made in the 1970s and contain trails that done exist any more (and of course don’t include newer trails).
My preference is to carry topo maps + compass and carry a small GPS for emergencies if I cannot locate myself.
In Canada the typos are quite good but have in my experience even less trail or stream information.
In both countries I recommend planning trips with someone local who knows the territory.
As a long distance hiker, I can promise that this monetary decision will result in wilderness rescues if not tragedies.
Even trails that have free apps there are people who try to go without...
If it's in OpenStreetMap, they can easily follow established trails using an app they are used to. I.e. less erosion. And when they get lost or injured, use the app to self rescue.
If the permit only covers a small area and it's not at the trail head, through hikers will rather buy a permit that covers the whole route.
Wish this was true everywhere!
To start with, the official law enforcement, and park maintenance is managed and facilitated by the state, payed by the tax payers.
Secondly, the associations like the one mentioned above, although making use of the resources of their members, are in part being bankrolled by the state. So, again, payed with tax payers' money.
Thirdly, the association, labelled an association of public benefit, should fit the following definition: "Elle n'exerce pas d'activité lucrative. Sa gestion est désintéressée. Elle ne fonctionne pas au profit d'un cercle restreint de personnes", or, after loosely translated: 1) It should not be profit driven 2) Its management should be selfless 3) It should not function at the benefit of only a restricted group of people.
And it this case, it sure sounds like point 2 and 3 are put in doubt with their patent and intellectual property fighting nonsense barring open maps from including their paths.
Beyond a recognition for the time and effort invested in the maintaining of the markings on the hiking trails they trace, it really looks like a disproportionate and misplaced application of intellectual property rights.
And taking into account that a lot of tax payers' money is making the entire endeavour possible, it would make some sense to return a bit of that value back to the tax payers by making the markings available for free in openly accessible maps.
When I go climbing I have to buy a local guide documenting all the historical climbing spots; the persons that sells the guide are the one that equipped and maintened these historical routes : is it selfishness ?