--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 22:43:17 -0600
From: "James R. Carter" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Map Use and Abuses in the case of the Scientist fired over  
Arctic Nat'l Wildlife Refuge maps
Sender: "James R. Carter" <[log in to unmask]>



There are many perspectives in this story that has appeared on many lists.  In
the 1960's I worked for USGS for six years.  I learned that this is a
conservative agency that is most concerned about their image.  And, they have
to be because there are many politicians who want to reduce their budget and
give their work over to the private sector.

The image of USGS is based in large part on the maps that are published under
the USGS name.  All of those topo maps reflect the USGS name and image.  The
special maps such as the Thelin and Pike Landforms map and the Tapestry
Geologic map are part of that image.  Many of these maps are now on the web,
carrying the USGS image.

While I did not get to see the many biologic and ecologic maps, including the
ANWR map, those maps were published on a USGS web site.  As such they carry the
name of USGS and thus are part of the image of USGS.  This agency has the
responsibility to monitor what is posted on its web sites.  The comments from
Scott below indicate that the maps in question were not the best image USGS
wanted to present.

>From: Scott McEathron <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: RE: Politics and science?  USGS Scientist fired over Arctic
>
>I was very impress with the quantity of the maps, but after actually looking
>at the maps of the caribou calving areas, I was very unimpressed with there
>quality.  
>______________________________________________________
>Scott R. McEathron
>University of Connecticut
>University Libraries

This issue brings to light one of the problems in our networked society.  I
think the great number of maps in question should be considered to be working
maps.  As such they represent works in progress.  They are not maps that are to
be considered the final product of an agency such as USGS.

So, how do such maps get distributed to the public as working maps without
being interpreted as finished products of USGS?  Perhaps the web pages showing
these maps should have been set up under the name of the contractor.  These
maps were the product of Ian Thomas, the scientist working under contract, and
not USGS. 

We in the academic community have the freedom to put things on our web pages
that do not reflect the image of the university.  That goes with being an
academic.  That is why we cherish tenure, so that we can be wild and
independent.   Scientists in govenment agencies do not have such freedoms, for
good reason.  

I believe the maps Ian Thomas had prepared and put on the web site were a
contribution to understanding how our world works.  I am sorry that I did not
get to see them and study them.  Hopefully, they and many more will appear as
working data in our efforts to understand how our world works.  

But, what is working data for one person is truth for another person.  Below is
a handout I wrote for one of my classes where we look at map use and abuse.  I
think there are some perspectives here that are relevant to this debate.

Jim Carter
===========================   
Gersmehl, 1985, 329,  wrote "Any person who puts information on a map has
several responsibilities.  The first and most obvious duty is to the data; the
mapmaker must try to arrange the map symbols in a way that shows the actual
distribution of the thing being mapped.  The choice of map symbols at this
conceptual level is purely arbitrary; any idiosyncratic set of squiggles is
quite acceptable if the only purpose is to map something so that the mapmaker
can study the pattern.  If another person will also use the map, then the
mapmaker has a second responsibility, viz., to spend the amount of time and
space necessary to educate the map-reader about the meaning of the symbols used
on the map.  In many cases this duty to the reader can be met by using
conventional symbols in a conventional manner and trusting that the map reader
is reasonably well educated in their interpretation.  The concept of
"conventional" includes such considerations as projection, generalization, and
perceptual filtering."

He goes on to note that there is a duty to ". . . protect the 'innocent
bystander' who might be affected if a map reader acts on the basis of
misinformation gained from the map.  In effect we must stretch the standard
communication models to include an effort to anticipate the ways in which the
map reader might misinterpret the map and the probable consequences of such
misinterpretations."

Ormeling, 1998, wrote: we must be concerned that not only do we get the right
data to the user but that the user gets the data right.

In a personal conversation at the Symposium on Cartographic Design and Research
in Ottawa in 1994, Muehrcke opined that ‘it just gets down to a question of map
use.’  In his formal paper from that Symposium, Muehrcke (1996) cited map use
many times in “The Logic of Map Design.”  Some examples from the paper include:
“Much of the discussion in this book focuses on the importance of the map
user.  I would go further to state that changes in the way maps are used in the
electronic age are probably far more significant than changes in how they are
made.” (272-3)  “The cartographic literature, including our textbooks, does not
seem to be as much at fault here as the cartographic literacy of those who use
maps.” (273)  “Some of our critics seem to have missed the point here--the
issue of user responsibility. . . users must learn to handle mapping tools
responsibly.” (275)  “If we are really concerned about the map user, the basis
for making much bigger and quicker gains is already within our grasp. We only
need to catalogue and teach the strategies practised by expert map makers and
users” (277)  “Unfortunately, . . . the level of user sophistication is
dismal.” (277)

Gersmehl, Philip J., 1985, "The Data, the Reader, and the Innocent Bystander--A
Parable for Map Users," The Professional Geographer, 37(3), 329-334.

Muehrcke, Phillip C., 1996, “The Logic of Map Design,” in C.H.Wood and
C.P.Keller, eds., Cartographic Design: Theoretical and Practical Perspectives.
Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 271-278.

Ormeling, Ferjan, 1998, “Map Use Steps and Their Data Quality Requirements,”
Cartographic Perspectives, 28, 21-24.
=============================   

Let us debate this topic as a matter of map use and not an issue of politics.

Jim Carter

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. James R. "Jim" Carter, Professor, Geography/Geology Department
Illinois State University,  Normal, IL 61790-4400  USA
Director, Laboratory for Integrated Learning and Technology, ISU,
and Past-President, Illinois GIS Association
      -- http://www.ilstu.edu/~jrcarter -- personal pages --
      -- http://lilt.ilstu.edu/jrcarter -- academic/research pages --  

tel: (309) 438-2833    fax: (309) 438-5310    [log in to unmask]
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
--- End Forwarded Message ---