Detailed trails on Topo U.S.?

[+whartonia]

I've got CityNavigator and Topo 2008 loaded onto my Garmin Vista HCx. I really thought that I'd be able to see the various trails in some of our nearby parks. All I'm seeing is a line running through the area that shows the elevation and some of the regular streets. I set the Map Detail to Highest before sending to the GPS. Am I missing something?

[+IBcrashen]

Do you see them on Mapsource/Topo?

 

You can only see one map at a time and CN shows before Topo. Are you turning off CN? Topo has more of those details.

To do that on the map page hit menu/ scroll down to Setup Map hit enter. Next page make sure the I is hightlighted on top and hit menu/ scroll down and turn on/off CN. You can also do it from the main menu page setup/map and the second part as above.

Edited April 2, 2008 by IBcrashen

[Motorcycle_Mama]

For the most part, the US Topo doesn't have a lot of trail information. Major trails, maybe, but that's about it.

[+embra]

It's usually the case that we have to run down trail data elsewhere...topo maps typically don't have much for us.

 

This was a good round-up of web sites offering user libraries of trail data.

[+briansnat]

You aren't going to see most trails on any topo mapping software. Trails are not like roads. Trail systems are in a constant state of flux, with new trails being built, old ones being closed and sections constantly being relocated.

 

Also road data is easily available to software makers. Trail data is much harder to obtain. You'd have to have an army of people out there GPSing trails and by the time they are done, much of the data would be out of date for the above reasons.

 

Topo does show a few long standing trials like the Appalachian Trail, PCT and some lesser known local ones that have been around for a long time. The thing is that these are way out of date. Topo in my state shows the route of the AT as it was about 20 years ago. Much has changed.

 

You can get some trail data through certain websites like localhikes.com or National Geographic's mapXchange.

[Forkeye]

Even the Garmin National Park topos 1:24k dont show many trails.I have quite a few different high quality paper maps that I use for hiking and even the trails drawn on them are an approximation of the real trail,they never show all the switch backs ,ups and downs etc.Roads and other geographical points seem pretty good on Garmin topos.They are of recreational quality not survey quality.

[+whartonia]

We mainly use the trails for Cub Scout hikes. Earlier this year (before we joined) the Den went out on a hike and were lost for 3 hours. I made sure to bring the GPSr when I went on our first hike (just in case). I marked camp as a waypoint. The leaders led and followed the marked trails. After a long 3.5 mile hike it was getting dark. At one point the leaders were contemplating a wrong turn. They asked me to see if we'd be heading in the right direction. Even though I couldn't see a marked trail I knew for certain that the turn would be heading in the opposite direction of camp.

 

This past weekend we were on a hike and they again asked for help from the GPS. They had a map of the trails and it matched up with what the GPSr was saying would be the direction towards camp. Without the map I couldn't have been completely certain since the trails were very winding with some loops overlapping.

 

I just wanted to make sure that I could get us out of a jam if I needed to. Guess I need to carry a trail map from the park to make absolutely certain.

[+Red90]

Guess I need to carry a trail map from the park to make absolutely certain.

 

ALWAYS carry a paper map and compass and know how to use them. NEVER rely solely on a GPS. Electronics can fail. Paper never locks up or runs out of batteries.

[snowfleurys]

Trail data is much harder to obtain. You'd have to have an army of people out there GPSing trails and by the time they are done, much of the data would be out of date for the above reasons.

 

But, there IS an army of people out there. When I was in the Los Angeles area for a few months 25 years ago, the Sierra Club was doing 30-40 hikes each Saturday and Sunday (plus weekday and multi day outings). I find it hard to believe that they do not have GPSed trails everywhere they have a local chapter. Or maybe it is a very well kept secret of membership.

[+briansnat]

Trail data is much harder to obtain. You'd have to have an army of people out there GPSing trails and by the time they are done, much of the data would be out of date for the above reasons.

 

But, there IS an army of people out there. When I was in the Los Angeles area for a few months 25 years ago, the Sierra Club was doing 30-40 hikes each Saturday and Sunday (plus weekday and multi day outings). I find it hard to believe that they do not have GPSed trails everywhere they have a local chapter. Or maybe it is a very well kept secret of membership.

 

The thing is that even if all Sierra Club members GPSed trails the data might not be reliable. They would need people trained in a certain set of standards, to produce trail data in a specific format.

 

Developing software using tracks cobbled together from numerous sources, some of questionable reliability is not a good idea. Did the person gathering the data use the correct datum? Did he walk the entire length of the trail? Did he wander off the trail to use the "bathroom" or check out a nice view? Was she using an accurate GPS?

 

I'm involved with mapping the trail systems in a few local state parks using GPS technology. The problems that are encountered in this small area with tracks being sent in various formats, or getting partial trail data, or data from portions of several trails are numerous. Project this over the entire country and you're talking a major logistical nightmare just compiling the data.

[+ibycus]

Guess I need to carry a trail map from the park to make absolutely certain.

 

ALWAYS carry a paper map and compass and know how to use them. NEVER rely solely on a GPS. Electronics can fail. Paper never locks up or runs out of batteries.

 

Or carry two or three GPSrs .

[+ibycus]

Developing software using tracks cobbled together from numerous sources, some of questionable reliability is not a good idea. Did the person gathering the data use the correct datum? Did he walk the entire length of the trail? Did he wander off the trail to use the "bathroom" or check out a nice view? Was she using an accurate GPS?

 

I wonder if some of the problems you're talking about could be dealt with automatically? I suppose it all depends on the number of repeats of the data. What I mean, is if you have 10 people follow one path, and 1 person follow a close, but not identical path, we should be able to 'throw out' the 1 track.

 

Dale

[+briansnat]

Developing software using tracks cobbled together from numerous sources, some of questionable reliability is not a good idea. Did the person gathering the data use the correct datum? Did he walk the entire length of the trail? Did he wander off the trail to use the "bathroom" or check out a nice view? Was she using an accurate GPS?

 

I wonder if some of the problems you're talking about could be dealt with automatically? I suppose it all depends on the number of repeats of the data. What I mean, is if you have 10 people follow one path, and 1 person follow a close, but not identical path, we should be able to 'throw out' the 1 track.

 

Dale

 

Which is fine, but there are over a million miles of hiking trail in the US. We're still talking a project of incredible proportions.

[+Red90]

The thing is that even if all Sierra Club members GPSed trails the data might not be reliable. They would need people trained in a certain set of standards, to produce trail data in a specific format.

 

Developing software using tracks cobbled together from numerous sources, some of questionable reliability is not a good idea. Did the person gathering the data use the correct datum? Did he walk the entire length of the trail? Did he wander off the trail to use the "bathroom" or check out a nice view? Was she using an accurate GPS?

 

Bahhhh....

 

You can either say "it is too tough" or "we'll do the best we can"........ Just start DOING IT and it will grow and get better.

 

See my sig... I'm doing it and it is working fine. I'd guess we have well over 50% of the trails in southern Alberta mapped and most are "high quality". This is really only with a handful of people supplying data.

 

You get the "best" maps if there is a local editor that can clean up the data as needed, but any data beats no data.

[snowfleurys]

Which is fine, but there are over a million miles of hiking trail in the US. We're still talking a project of incredible proportions.

1. Like most things in the world today - if it were easy it would likely already be done.

2. You can be sure that if you do not even start, you will never have anything.

3. Sure not everyone that has a GPSr, would be capable of high quality GPSing. Standards and procedures would have to be established and followed. It would take a lot of orginization and cooperation, but I see no reason it could not be accomplished.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

We mainly use the trails for Cub Scout hikes. ... snip

 

They had a map of the trails and it matched up with what the GPSr was saying would be the direction towards camp. Without the map I couldn't have been completely certain since the trails were very winding with some loops overlapping.

 

... snip Guess I need to carry a trail map from the park to make absolutely certain.

Perhaps if the scout are going to hike these same trails a lot, it might be worthwhile for you to create your own trail map/track file of the trails for your GPS unit.

 

Having said that, as others have said, when hiking, it's always advisable to carry a paper map in addition to other navigational tools.

[+Red90]

2. You can be sure that if you do not even start, you will never have anything.

 

Yep, that is my feeling. I've been running my trail mapping project for a couple of years and the map just gets better and better over time. It is not an all or nothing thing. It is not a lot of work to manage and I get to personally use the benefits. A win win situation.

 

I believe that each area needs a local editor in order to clean up the data. I figure ten people could manage Canada, so a little country like the US should be able to manage with about the same. Considering you have ten times the population, it is pretty embarrassing that it has not already been finished....

[GeoBobC]

I'm with Red90. Out in Washington state I've been working on a project to create very accurate trail data for three areas east of Seattle. Having nearly completed the project, I heard about a similar project with more extensive coverage. I forwarded my five years of data along to the company (for free.) Check it out: this is great stuff, and hopefully the wave of the future:

 

http://www.switchbacks.com/maps/NW_Trails.html

[+AndrewRJ]

I'm with Red90. Out in Washington state I've been working on a project to create very accurate trail data for three areas east of Seattle. Having nearly completed the project, I heard about a similar project with more extensive coverage. I forwarded my five years of data along to the company (for free.) Check it out: this is great stuff, and hopefully the wave of the future:

 

http://www.switchbacks.com/maps/NW_Trails.html

Hehehehe Moun10bike will get a huge kick out of being called a company.

 

Edit... Thats great that you have such accurate data. it will make a big difference in theose area.

Edited April 3, 2008 by AndrewRJ

[SiliconFiend]

<snip>

You'd have to have an army of people out there GPSing trails

<snip>

You mean like www.openstreetmap.org? No need for restrictive standards--just get out there, collect the tracks and make the maps.