Yes, we seem to agree that it is the park data, seemingly "trying to follow the line of the road," but wandering quite a bit, which are in error.

Yes, it would either be submitting an "error / bug report" to State Parks about the data around here, or to get everybody involved (but add a layer of indirection, could be quicker long-term, could be slower) contacting GreenInfo about their CPAD data (and there's good people there who are very open to being helpful to OSM).

Another nice round trip between Steve and Black_Diamond, I'll say.  (Last one I remember was your excellent correction to USBR 95 earlier this summer around the Wilder mountain bike connections being too steep and dirt).  Now we have CycleNet 295 as the connector between the 2*M routes (22 and 27) and 95; thanks for that!

And thanks for this one, too.  If you DO get to saying something to State Parks or GreenInfo, please mention 236 and BB, as it's the same problem there, too.

Cheers!