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
----------------------------------------------------------------------