<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Yes, USGS has basically replaced the old 1:24,000 “quads” or 7.5 minute maps with something called “US Topo”. The trouble is that most of the “US Topos” aren’t really ready for prime time – from a hiker’s perspective. Most of the default US Topo maps are missing all kinds of key details/layers that were on the old quads. For example, look at these snippets from the old vs. new versions around East Glacier Park. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Old quad (1995):<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><a href="http://www.phlumf.com/temp/old-usgs.JPG">http://www.phlumf.com/temp/old-usgs.JPG</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>New US Topo:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><a href="http://www.phlumf.com/temp/new-us-topo.JPG">http://www.phlumf.com/temp/new-us-topo.JPG</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>The old Quad had things like the railroad tracks, power lines, buildings/structures, the “1-36 mile grids”, pipelines, labeled park/forest/wilderness boundaries, forest cover, private land claims, and most importantly: Trails! Each of these things can be really useful – sometimes critical – for hikers. I’d rather have a slightly older quad with these things than a new US Topo without it. There are some individual US Topo maps that have these layers added, but they’re not very widespread. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>This missing information is mostly available for download separately, as separate layers… You need to go here:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><a href="http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/">http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Then you need special software to splice everything back together, and either a lot of time, or a script wizard to make it all work. Only then, do you have the problem mentioned below of splicing individual maps together so the centering makes sense. If you happen to have ArcGIS ($1000/yr) and know how to use it well, you can likely get this done… But that’s not a practical option for most. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>In addition, the default coloration on the US Topos not good – try reading the stream names on the new US Topos – the blue is too light. The elevation contour lines are all the same thickness (too thick), making them a lot harder to read/follow (old maps have thick 200ft lines, and thin 50ft lines). All the elements are vector graphics,(which means they could fix these things, btw), and you lose some of the fine details on the older bitmaps (DRGs) – look at the contours along Two Medicine Creek. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>This is all digital information, so all of these issues should be addressable with time… provided someone is actually working on it. In addition, since this is all digital you should be able to center such a map wherever you want, and have it custom-generated. Again, something that you could probably do with ArcGIS, provided you have the source data files. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>As for the comments below about splicing the maps – been there, done that… though, only with the older USGS Quads. Haven’t tried it with the US Topos due to the issues outlined above. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>-Jonathan<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></a></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> cdt-l-bounces@backcountry.net [mailto:cdt-l-bounces@backcountry.net] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Glen Winters<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, January 27, 2014 3:30 PM<br><b>To:</b> cdt-l<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Cdt-l] quad maps unnecessary<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:black'>The USGS topo's are being updated, the current versions are 2010, 2011 or 2012. <a href="http://nationalmap.gov/ustopo/index.html">http://nationalmap.gov/ustopo/index.html</a> free to download and use as you desire. If your printer supports poster printing you could print at home. They do not have the trail information overlaid, at least on the 10 maps I looked at for the PCT area, but do have PDF geolocation data imbedded. They also have older maps that do have trails marked on the maps. Otherwise your correct they are headed to GIS mapping. I wish I knew a bit more about overlaying the trail onto the maps I could make some more options available for hikers. Larger maps designed to print on 11 x 17 paper for a wider field of view for off trail exploring and or getting lost. I'm trying to learn more about it. I'm pretty good at manipulating graphics files, and could easily merge a few maps together, or write a script to do so programatically, cut out the pieces that work best, etc, The difficult part is putting back in the map datum other than manually page by page, selecting the correct deviation which maybe a degree off depending on which maps are merged, and making sure the distance scale is also correctly sized, all of which may lead to errors. The National Geographic map software, that has been discontinued, used scanned copies of the older USGS topo maps, from Halfmile PCT maps you can see where the corners of the maps merge from color differences in the maps. It would be nice to get a group together and open source something similar. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:black'>Argentina<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></body></html>