Re: [at-l] reading maps was Re: Re yogi-ing hikers

>My favorite exammple of reading maps is one I have told here before.  Upon
>starting a weekend hike heading south from High Point, NJ we ran into a
>couple coming off the trail.  they had all new equipment right down to the
>chair hanging from his pack.  It looked like they went into the outfitters
>and upon handing over his American Express card said "give me everything
>we need".  He complained that the NYNJTC map was all wrong in that from a
>particular place on the trail Lake Rutherford was way out of place.  When
>I got to that view spot, I pulled out my copy of the same map and,
>orienting it using the sun and my watch, found the lake right where it
>should have been.  Looking at the trail I realized that the trail was in a
>bend too small to show on the map and he must have oriented his map to the
>trail.  I assume he carries a CP in case he gets lost.
>
>As far as ups and downs go, one must remember that most contour intervals
>are 20'.  10' ups and downs every few feet are as or more arduous than a
>long climb but will show on the map as level.  This has suckered me
>numerous times.
>Rich
>
>>
>> Aw gee. I don't think we're extreme on BPL...Nah..not really... well not
me.
>>
>> I thought I'd toss my two cents in as to why I tend to carry the data
book, maps and guidebooks for
>> the section(s) I'm hiking in.
>>
>> I've generally found the maps to actually be pretty good. I actually
don't know why so many people
>> bitch at them and say they're wrong and the trail is either way harder or
way easier than they
>> imply. My suspision is that some people don't really know how to read the
maps, but that is just a
>> guess. I'm sure many people look at a profile map and then wonder why the
trail is going up and down
>> so much because on the map it did not do that. Or maybe people forget
that just because the trail
>> follows a contour line on a map that doesn't mean it is flat. It could
change elevation within that
>> line all the time (and often does).  I find the map useful for geting a
sense of the land I'm in.
>> I've rarely had to use the map to get myself un-misplaced. A compass is
much more useful for that
>> purpose. However, a map can be quite handy if I want to take an alternate
route.
>>
>> The Data Book is a great quick reference. It lets me determine how far
things are from me and I can
>> find the informaiton much more quickly in it than I usually can on a map
even though it is usually
>> printed there too.
>>
>> The guidebooks are a bit varied in the details they give, but some are
exceptional and I really
>> enjoy reading them. I enjoy reading the trail descriptions (at least
glancing at them) and then
>> reading any local history or about points of interest that the guides
might mention. They help make
>> the area come alive for me. I learn things I might otherwise never find
out about or even know I
>> should explore.
>>
>> This is an area where I definteily don't go lightweight. I hate cutting
up books. They fall apart on
>> me so I take the entire databook and guide and map(s) for the secitons
I'm in. I could save
>> considerable weight if I did cut them up, but I don't think I'll ever do
that. If I did I'd be one
>> of those "extreme" folks OB is thinking of over on BPL... :)
[ *** too many quoted lines.  automatically truncated *** ]

* From the AT-L |  Need help? http://www.backcountry.net/faq.html  *

==============================================================================
To:            Tim Hewitt <Tim.Hewitt@fairchildsemi.com>, at-l@backcountry.net