[at-l] Maine Maps was in support of maps

[papabear.nyc@xxxxxxxxxxx (Papa Bear)]

>The best solution of the trail for me was the Maine AT guide, with the
>trail description on the back of the maps. Didn't bother with the rest of
>the book. I wished all the sections were like that...
>
>skeeter

I agree with many posts in support of Maps.  For me they are 1) a
preparation aid, 2) a navigation aid and 3) AA great help post-facto in
putting together my journal and labelling my photos.

As for the Maine Maps I also think they are great;

1) The trail descriptions on the back are great! (for other sections I would
xerox that information).
2) The site-lines to mountains are great (BUT No Katahdin site-line from
Sugarloaf!  How could they have left that out!)
3) The elevation profiles are great (Especially Map #1 - awesome when you
see it!)

BUT

<rant on>
The maps themselves SUCK!  Whoever likes those shaded relief maps should be
banned from map making! <g>  Give me back the tried and true countour map.
I couldn't even read elevations or follow contour lines from one side of the
mountain to the other.

Shaded relief maps were invented in the 1940s or 1950s by the USGS in a
failed atttempt to make them more readable to the public.  Give us a break,
learning to read a contour map is not brain surgery!
<rant off>

And that's all I have to say about that! <gg>

Pb