Hard Copy Map Updates (Map 8)

[Thom Kaye]

All-
  One of the priorities for the PATC maps committee is that our maps are up to date and accurate. When I took over as the chairperson, I instituted a rule that requires every PATC published map be revised every four years regardless of its popularity. Moreover, our assurance is that our maps will be maintained locally by the people who actually use them. This is easier said than done as it requires "ground truthing" of the maps data. Let me elaborate....

Our two main competitors are Trails Illustrated and Delorme. Both of these companies have a great reputation and provide a somewhat decent product based on the public's criteria. The one major difference between us and them is that they rely on the rangers to review and submit updates of their maps by sending them drafts of the upcoming sheets. On the contrary, PATC travels to the ranger stations and sets up meetings with the rangers to discuss the current and future state of the areas covered by the individual map. Moreover we contact the actual trail overseers to get more personalized and accurate information about the trails. Based on my discussions with the rangers at the local parks, they don't have time or interest to review the draft maps that are sent to their office and would appreciate a personal visit.

I personally walk at least 50% of the trails on each sheet to get a first hand account of what may have changed. This is not enough. What I want is a comprehensive walk through of each map sheet before it is published. I feel that with ranger, trail overseer, and field checked collaboration, we can eliminate virtually all of the errors that may occur on our sheets.

At the moment, Map 8 is currently under revision. I am looking for individuals to survey the trails contained on this sheet for compliance of our accuracy standards. Map 8 extends from Snickers Gap to the North (Near Bear's Den hostel) Southward to the borders of Shenandoah NP.

[Jim Tomlin]

I doubt the location of the AT on Map 8 has changed very much if at
all, but I did GPS all of the AT on Map 8 in December 2010 and January
2011. I kept my tracks and can submit them.

Jim Tomlin
PATC Supervisor of Communications

[Tom Johnson]

Thom - I live only a 15 minute walk from the  AT Map 8 section, and I maintain 3.5 miles of the AT on Map 8.  I have personally walked all of the AT on Map 8 except for the Roller Coaster in the past 6 months.  Now that I know it is up for revision I'll make sure to get comments to you.  I will send you comments even if there are no suggested revisions, just so you know thas I have laid eyes on each portion.

 

Of course the best and most accurate comments will come from Jon Rindt and Lloyd Parriott, the co-DMs. Whatever they say will be authoritative.

 

Tom

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Thom Kaye <thom...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Mrzac...@aol.com]

Thom, you are right on target and express so well an issue I just picked away at with two of our clubs and ATC Hq two months ago - with little success. As you know, we finally after nearly 30 years are receiving replacements for the ridiculous "funnel maps", strip maps for the Trail in SW VA. However, they are contract produced with review by the ranger districts much as you describe, with similar outcome. We did manage to obtain digital drafts of two of the sheets for a more thorough review by the clubs, but due to the short turn around time allowed, holidays, lack of experience and appreciation for the importance of the effort and the snow cover and icy weather, little field truthing was done. We were able to correct several errors but in no way could we do a proper job of the review as we could not get afield in the time provided. And we have still not seen the entire map set. I do not think the clubs comprehend the concept of marketing to our strong suit - intimate familiarity with the Trail. As you describe, no other group has the Trail knowledge the clubs possess. But they need to be educated in why it is important and how to apply it. The other vendors are eating our lunch with their products. Providing a better product is the first step out of the cycle of low sales, low budget, low expectations, low accuracy product. And please understand I am not describing PATC's products, just focusing on what we have for our section and what I have past seen from some other parts of the AT.

 

Is there any interest in establishing standards for pre press review of map revisions to submit to the clubs for approval to be applied to maps AT wide?

 

I fear due to schedule and other artificial constraints we will be producing a new set of maps improved but still not what they need be to compete in the market. My choice would be to delay printing until coordinated review could be accomplished even if it means having to use the previous edition "funnel maps" one more season.

 

What do yall think?

[D. Tundra]

Hello,

 

I read Thom's e-mail and would like to express my opinion about this project.  As a user, I want to see a significantly updated Massanutten South map with the tens of miles of unblazed tails forming great loops and the relatively new blazed trail going from Rt. 211 south and forming a loop with the Massanutten South Trail.  Wanderbirds hiking club was leading a trip on it 2 weeks ago and I hiked it last week and 2 years ago, yet this map has not been modified since the trail was blazed 2+ years ago.  I could send you the traces and descriptions.  Also, the area of the Sleepy Creek in VA/WV has a lot of relocations and new trails.  New trails were added in the area of the Cowans Gap Lake in PA on the Tuscarora Trail and the Tuscarora Trail was relocated in many places in the Northern part of it.  I would like to see maps of those, preferably split into two to add more details.  Map 8 as far as I know only has changes in the area of the Sky Meadows, of which the VA State Park GIS department makes a pretty good free printable *.pdf map available on the web, so again as a user I don't care that much for an update of map 8.  I would like to see a new map with all the trails along the Potomac River on the VA side starting at Roosevelt Island and going to where Potomac merges with the Seneca Creek.  PATC has maps that cover some areas but they are not covering even 50% of them.

 

PATC as a volunteer organization has very limited resources which I as a user would prefer to see applied to the updates of the maps with the major changes.

 

Sincerely,

Dimitri Tundra

 

----- Original Message -----

[Jim Tomlin]

PATC earns about 1/3rd of it's total income from map & publication
sales. The organization has to balance map update frequency not only
with the amount of trail changes but also with income generation.
There is a wide variation in sales of the PATC maps - A.T. maps and
SNP maps in particular are huge sellers, even more so when a new
edition is created. If we were to let those languish because their
trails don't change much, then the organization would have
significantly less money to fund all of our volunteer projects.

Are the "tens of miles of unblazed trails" official USFS trails? If
not, and we were to put those on our maps, the FS would probably howl
like crazy at us. They realize that people venture off the official
trails, they just don't want it publicized or encouraged in any way.
Just mentioning this from personal experience...I attend all the
annual USFS/PATC collaboration meetings and this issue comes up fairly
often.

Jim T.

[Thom Kaye]

Great feedback from everyone. Without knowing what the concerns of the members are, PATC wouldn't know where to focus our efforts.

 

In regards to Steve's comments.....

 

I have initiated discussions with Brian King (ATC Map coordinator) about standardizing the AT maps. As you and I have discussed, nothing in this line of work seems to move along as swiftly as we would like. I would expect the ATC to champion this idea but unfortunately that does not appear to be happening. In addition to maps not going through the proper channels for revisions, there are other concerns as well. For example: The entire map collection along the AT is produced by 5 separate entities; they are: ATC, PATC, MaineATC, Keystone Trails Association and NYNJ Trail Conference. This results in five different looking maps. Some entities decided to make their trails red while others (PATC) have their roads as red. It may not sound like a big deal but I can assure you it has caused confusion for some through hikers before. I discussed standardizing all of our sheets with Brian who appeared to be interested; however, I haven’t heard anything back from him in many months. Perhaps we can persuade all of the AT cartographers to collaborate at this year’s Biennial conference in Emory, VA?

In regards to Dimitri’s comments…..

Map H (Southern Massanutten Mt.) is currently at the printers. I visited the Lee ranger district on Thursday of last week and sat down with Wade to discuss changes to the sheet. Moreover, I held discussions with the trail overseers to insure nothing was missed. I believe the trail you are referring to is the Brown’s Hollow trail? I can assure you it is on the map sheet and is well represented.

The Tuscarora trail is currently being surveyed by the Project Lucidity team. We are making great strides and hope to have a new map (Map L) finished by this fall.

The reason why Map 8 is getting revised is because we are almost out of stock. Also, if you are referring to the free PDF map that exists on the Sky Meadows State Park website (clicky), it was not made by the State Park GIS team. It was contracted out to an outside organization (Imperial Multimedia, LLC) which created a planar map (no elevation; not topographic) without coordinates which is not very useful for hikers.

I do recognize that some of our maps are out of date and require significant updates. We have shifted many maps to the top of our priority list based on this fact. However, it is important to understand that if a map shows a publication date of more than 4-6 years, customers will assume it is out of date. In return they will reach for a competitor’s product with a newer date regardless if it accurate or not. We are digitizing our entire stock of maps to insure a quick turnaround of map updates whenever the 4 year threshold arrives. We are currently 75% finished with this venture.

Finally….I create frequent tweets about the status of our maps. You should become a follower; @patcmaps. http://twitter.com/#!/PATCMaps

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 1:41 PM, D. Tundra <tart...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
* Please note change of email address

[Mrzac...@aol.com]

There is value in somewhere having recorded those numerous old fire trails, local trails, woods roads and other pathways, including the old AT routes. They may become needed and hold value to many users for a host of reasons. On our maps several public roads have been deliberately omitted to reduce woods access. Same for your area and sensitive installations. At what point does this censorship become the slippery slope? 

[D. Tundra]

Jim,

I agree with you about the financial part, but partially. Every 3-5 years I
go to the PATC and Maryland DNR sites and buy all the updated and new maps.
If the map is not updated I don't buy it, obviously. Majority of people are
not like that - they buy a map when they start hiking in a particular area
or when their map is lost or torn. Thus from the financial point,
reprinting vs. updating is not that huge, I think. I may be wrong on that.

As far as the official unblazed trails, I am not even sure that such a
thing exist. Official trails (not forest roads) are all either blazed or
marked at the junctions. So no, my trails in the southern Massanuttens are
not official, but they are good. That's where I want to make a distinction
between a park and a forest. In a park we probably don't want to put
unofficial trails on a map (e.g. Oventop or The Peak in the Shen. Nat. Pk.
North. should probably be left out of the map), but trails in the Rapidan
WMA should be in. In fact, we put unblazed trails of the Doubletop on the
map 10 and nobody complained (that's Rapidan WMA). The only criteria should
be that they are in decent condition. And obviously, they are marked with a
different line thickness compared to the official trails.

Dimitri

[Mrzac...@aol.com]

In the volunteer world reprint vs update/revise may not be huge, but in the commercial world revisions are priced on degree of effort, accuracy and methodology. Labor drives most of the cost, obviously, as all other costs remain relatively constant per sheet size per size of press run. Some can price by square mile mapped. Paper, ink and press time do not change much and materials costs vary little from the first edition to the revision 3 years or so later. Photorevision is relatively cheap, especially with digital photography. Ground control, survey, field truthing, manual methods etc drive costs higher. Probably most of us have the map addiction where we like you, buy the new version because it's new data.

 

I am seeing in our Districts "official" trails removed from maps simply because there is no budget to maintain them. But if they were retained on the map use may continue at a level adequate to keep the footpath open until the budget is found to maintain the blazes. Or the problem could be handed off to volunteer groups to maintain and retain the trail. So I favor keeping the feature on the map even if designated as abandoned.

[D. Tundra]

Thom,

 

I think that's the name of the New Trail, but I'm not sure since the maps is where I get the trail name information.

 

I don't think that PATC is facing a lot of challenges from DeLorme or Nat. Geo or Garmin.  PATC doesn't make software maps (shame on us!) and Delorme only makes Large scale state map with Gazetteer among printed maps (only good for driving to a destination).  Nat. Geo's Trails Illustrated is 100,000 scale and PATC is mostly 64,000 with inserts of smaller scales.  Northern sections of Tuscarora are 100,000 scale, which as I said before I would very much like to see split in two, especially with the number of trails growing in the Sleepy Creek and in PA.  I think the real problem is that the PATC maps are not available in large quantities in the stores.  I am talking about REI and Hudson Trails in Rockville from personal experience.  Out of maybe 25 maps made by PATC, we see only 5-6 and their stock is very small, so AT maps are always on the endangered species list and Tuscarora maps are just not there.  Same holds true for the guide books as well.

 

Now regarding the unblazed trails in the Southern Massanutten.  They are very good at forming loops and that's why I like them.  I understand that it's not possible to put them in the coming up edition of the map, but It would be great to see them in the future ones.

 

Dimitri

[D. Tundra]

I have huge number of them as traces on my web site www.gpshikingdc.com and still have many more to put there.  If you need a particular old tr. and it's not there, send me an e-mail - I may have it.  Also, Maptech has a site with historical maps for many states, which may be helpful as well.

 

-Dimitri

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Mrzac...@aol.com

To: jfto...@gmail.com ; patc-maps...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 2:33 PM

Subject: Re: Hard Copy Map Updates (Map 8)

[Mrzac...@aol.com]

We see it with coverage of the popular (over a million visits per year) Mt Rogers area in SW VA. National Geo maps are the standard, its special paper and beautiful work supplanting a locally produced utilitarian two color map that served for several years. FS uses it as their standard issue to staff and sells it in their outlets. Some vendors sell the Nat Geo and do not stock the ATC. PATC produces a quality product that competes well, I would think. Sorry I did not make clear I intended the market observation of lost lunch to apply to what I know in SW.

 

In a message dated 2/8/2011 15:43:34 Eastern Standard Time, tart...@gmail.com writes:

Thom,

 

I think that's the name of the New Trail, but I'm not sure since the maps is where I get the trail name information.

 

I don't think that PATC is facing a lot of challenges from DeLorme or Nat. Geo or Garmin.  PATC doesn't make software maps (shame on us!) and Delorme only makes Large scale state map with Gazetteer among printed maps (only good for driving to a destination).  Nat. Geo's Trails Illustrated is 100,000 scale and PATC is mostly 64,000 with inserts of smaller scales.  Northern sections of Tuscarora are 100,000 scale, which as I said before I would very much like to see split in two, especially with the number of trails growing in the Sleepy Creek and in PA.  I think the real problem is that the PATC maps are not available in large quantities in the stores.  I am talking about REI and Hudson Trails in Rockville from personal experience.  Out of maybe 25 maps made by PATC, we see only 5-6 and their stock is very small, so AT maps are always on the endangered species list and Tuscarora maps are just not there.  Same holds true for the guide books as well.

 

Now regarding the unblazed trails in the Southern Massanutten.  They are very good at forming loops and that's why I like them.  I understand that it's not possible to put them in the coming up edition of the map, but It would be great to see them in the future ones.

 

Dimitri

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Thom Kaye

To: D. Tundra

Cc: patc-maps...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 2:33 PM

Subject: Re: Hard Copy Map Updates (Map 8)

Great feedback from everyone. Without knowing what the concerns of the members are, PATC wouldn't know where to focus our efforts.

 

In regards to Steve's comments.....

 

I have initiated discussions with Brian King (ATC Map coordinator) about standardizing the AT maps. As you and I have discussed, nothing in this line of work seems to move along as swiftly as we would like. I would expect the ATC to champion this idea but unfortunately that does not appear to be happening. In addition to maps not going through the proper channels for revisions, there are other concerns as well. For example: The entire map collection along the AT is produced by 5 separate entities; they are: ATC, PATC, MaineATC, Keystone Trails Association and NYNJ Trail Conference. This results in five different looking maps. Some entities decided to make their trails red while others (PATC) have their roads as red. It may not sound like a big deal but I can assure you it has caused confusion for some through hikers before. I discussed standardizing all of our sheets with Brian who appeared to be interested; however, I haven’t heard anything back from him in many months. Perhaps we can persuade all of the AT cartographers to collaborate at this year’s Biennial conference in Emory, VA?

In regards to Dimitri’s comments…..

Map H (Southern Massanutten Mt.) is currently at the printers. I visited the Lee ranger district on Thursday of last week and sat down with Wade to discuss changes to the sheet. Moreover, I held discussions with the trail overseers to insure nothing was missed. I believe the trail you are referring to is the Brown’s Hollow trail? I can assure you it is on the map sheet and is well represented.

The Tuscarora trail is currently being surveyed by the Project Lucidity team. We are making great strides and hope to have a new map (Map L) finished by this fall.

The reason why Map 8 is getting revised is because we are almost out of stock. Also, if you are referring to the free PDF map that exists on the Sky Meadows State Park website (clicky), it was not made by the State Park GIS team. It was contracted out to an outside organization (Imperial Multimedia, LLC) which created a planar map (no elevation; not topographic) without coordinates which is not very useful for hikers.

I do recognize that some of our maps are out of date and require significant updates. We have shifted many maps to the top of our priority list based on this fact. However, it is important to understand that if a map shows a publication date of more than 4-6 years, customers will assume it is out of date. In return they will reach for a competitor’s product with a newer date regardless if it accurate or not. We are digitizing our entire stock of maps to insure a quick turnaround of map updates whenever the 4 year threshold arrives. We are currently 75% finished with this venture.

Finally….I create frequent tweets about the status of our maps. You should become a follower; @patcmaps. http://twitter.com/#!/PATCMaps

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 1:41 PM, D. Tundra <tart...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello,

 

I read Thom's e-mail and would like to express my opinion about this project.  As a user, I want to see a significantly updated Massanutten South map with the tens of miles of unblazed tails forming great loops and the relatively new blazed trail going from Rt. 211 south and forming a loop with the Massanutten South Trail.  Wanderbirds hiking club was leading a trip on it 2 weeks ago and I hiked it last week and 2 years ago, yet this map has not been modified since the trail was blazed 2+ years ago.  I could send you the traces and descriptions.  Also, the area of the Sleepy Creek in VA/WV has a lot of relocations and new trails.  New trails were added in the area of the Cowans Gap Lake in PA on the Tuscarora Trail and the Tuscarora Trail was relocated in many places in the Northern part of it.  I would like to see maps of those, preferably split into two to add more details.  Map 8 as far as I know only has changes in the area of the Sky Meadows, of which the VA State Park GIS department makes a pretty good free printable *.pdf map available on the web, so again as a user I don't care that much for an update of map 8.  I would like to see a new map with all the trails along the Potomac River on the VA side starting at Roosevelt Island and going to where Potomac merges with the Seneca Creek.  PATC has maps that cover some areas but they are not covering even 50% of them.

 

PATC as a volunteer organization has very limited resources which I as a user would prefer to see applied to the updates of the maps with the major changes.

 

Sincerely,

Dimitri Tundra

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Thom Kaye

To: patc-maps...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 6:52 AM

Subject: Hard Copy Map Updates (Map 8)

All-
  One of the priorities for the PATC maps committee is that our maps are up to date and accurate. When I took over as the chairperson, I instituted a rule that requires every PATC published map be revised every four years regardless of its popularity. Moreover, our assurance is that our maps will be maintained locally by the people who actually use them. This is easier said than done as it requires "ground truthing" of the maps data. Let me elaborate....

Our two main competitors are Trails Illustrated and Delorme. Both of these companies have a great reputation and provide a somewhat decent product based on the public's criteria. The one major difference between us and them is that they rely on the rangers to review and submit updates of their maps by sending them drafts of the upcoming sheets. On the contrary, PATC travels to the ranger stations and sets up meetings with the rangers to discuss the current and future state of the areas covered by the individual map. Moreover we contact the actual trail overseers to get more personalized and accurate information about the trails. Based on my discussions with the rangers at the local parks, they don't have time or interest to review the draft maps that are sent to their office and would appreciate a personal visit.

I personally walk at least 50% of the trails on each sheet to get a first hand account of what may have changed. This is not enough. What I want is a comprehensive walk through of each map sheet before it is published. I feel that with ranger, trail overseer, and field checked collaboration, we can eliminate virtually all of the errors that may occur on our sheets.

At the moment, Map 8 is currently under revision. I am looking for individuals to survey the trails contained on this sheet for compliance of our accuracy standards. Map 8 extends from Snickers Gap to the North (Near Bear's Den hostel) Southward to the borders of Shenandoah NP.

[Thom Kaye]

Cartographic censorship….indeed a slippery slope. However, you must understand why the decision is made to show only selected trails. Firstly, USFS and other entities sell our maps in their park stores. They are a major source of sales for our maps. If we don’t respect their wishes, we may end up losing a huge chunk of our revenue. Secondly, many trails are closed because of conservation purposes. When you say “deliberately omitted”, do you know of other reasons than conservation?

I could write a book on how ignorant the general public is about geography. Take for example this article about the woman who is suing Google because she followed their walking directions and was hit by a car. (Clicky) Most people do not know the difference between map scales, projections, coordinate systems, etc. I see people walking the trails all the time wih Delorme and Nat Geo maps. The problem is that we are small volunteer organization. We cannot compete with the marketing of NatGeo or Delorme. However, we surely will not be second best when it comes to quality. I have a million ideas that I would love to implement that would really make our organization world class; however, it would require a full time staff. I really could go on and on....

I seriously encourage everyone to get on twitter and start following the regular updates of our GIS and cartographic team. It is an excellent medium to follow our status.

[D. Tundra]

Thom,

 

Quick unrelated questions.  Has the new PATC map commission produced any maps strictly through GIS (not through the old method of transparent paper and not through scanning the old maps)?  If yes, what map(s) and also are there any differences in map feature conventions between the old and the new maps?

 

I'm CC'ing this question to other members because I think they may be interested as well.

 

-Dimitri

[Thom Kaye]

Since I took over as the chairperson (~ 4 years), I have made all of our maps digitally. That is, using GIS centerline data as a source. This would include: Maps 1, 2-3, 4, 5-6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, H, and K.

 

Since the data is centerline, it needs to be cartographically displaced to avoid clutter and to insure clarity. All cartographic conventions are maintained in regards to relative positioning, feature geometry, etc. 

[Mrzac...@aol.com]

Absolutely! I figured you knew I understand. There is an old guy's joke about all cartographers being liars. Practical necessity. Can't factually depict features. Just as meeting market needs - practical necessity. Client needs. And as volunteers in a non profit it can get even more complicated. We gave away the market in SW through an ill advised budget decision that, when not rectified, opened the door to the competition. Created it in the case of Mt Rogers.

 

Other examples of deliberately omitted - protection of an asset, political consideration or diminution of a problem comes to mind. I do not wish to spell them out on this public post and you must know the ones I intend, but Camp David safely comes to mind. It was depicted on PATC maps and the Trail cut a corner of the facility I believe. I do not know about current maps or route, but seems last time I hiked VA, Camp David was not mapped or perhaps was no longer on the AT route. Same with the now decommissioned Mt Weather, once was identified and crossed by the AT. Camp Hoover? In SW VA it is roads leading to old woods roads and logging railroad beds, problem hunting or party areas or areas of sensitive resources such as endangered species, conflicts/difficult neighbors, AT shelters, rights of way, etc.

 

Competition with the commercial firms is multifaceted. You do well and will continue to do so. The market advantage Trail clubs have is the up to date knowledge base. The advantage PATC has is further enhanced by having good competent people.

[Mrzac...@aol.com]

It would be great to get cartographers together for a session or two during biennial at Emory (VA). PATH is a co-host and I am sure we can find a room for such a meeting. Whereas northern AT maps seem mostly club produced, southern AT maps are mostly FS/ATC produced, due in part to about 75% of the AT in the South traversing FS land.

 

The bad news is at least for the Ranger Districts with which we work, New River and Mt Rogers, their staff will not participate in the biennial because they will be on July 4 holiday.

 

Even without FS staff joining, Brian could speak to most Southern AT cartographic concerns as FS actually drawing AT maps may be a thing of the past. Any FS cartographers still involved may wish to attend if invited, even if it would be on their own time.  

[Jim Tomlin]

I plan to attend the entire biennial this year. I can contribute in
any way that is desired.

Jim Tomlin
PATC Supervisor of Communications