Advise needed - creating trail maps for Land Trust

[Janet78]

Thanks for reading this...

 

I am working with the local land trust to create a trail guide for town. It is in CT - so it is hilly and forested.

 

I can't afford the backpack GPS units, so the most accurate handheld within a reasonable price range (under $600 if possible) that can create routes, and has a feature that I can record locations (like interesting geology or a nice view, wetlands, etc) would be great.

 

I have access to the property boundary lines in a digital format for the town.

 

Which software should I use? My husband has used ARC view, but isn't an expert. Should we go with ARC view, or is there another software program that we can use to create accurate and professional looking maps? It looks like there are some online that are free....

 

Thanks a million for the help!!!

Janet

[FanMan]

Thanks for reading this...

 

I am working with the local land trust to create a trail guide for town. It is in CT - so it is hilly and forested.

 

What town? I'm nearly done mapping one section of the Clinton Land Trust sections as I skied the trails this winter (for my own use; the paper map they provide is pretty poor).

 

Almost any GPS will do what you want, though the later Garmins with the improved chipset will give better accuracy. I used a 60CSx, what software you use depends on what you want to do with the maps later.

[+myotis]

Definately go with Garmin. They work for this and there are free tools to do what you want. I have done enstensive trail GPSing and points to make trail maps. I started with my 60CSX and it worked great. Now I have a CO and it works great too. The CO is easier to use and the screen is twice as big. The Oregon would also do a fine job. With any of them they will create a track file (with more than sufficient accuracy) of where the trail is and you can also create waypoints.

 

There is a freware program GPSmapedit that will easily do what you need to create the map. It takes a little bit to figure it out. Once you get you map file set up (I could send you a blank file that has the setting correct), it is real simple. Once you clean up your track files (easy to do) you basiclly drag and drop them. It will also easily handle shapfiles as long as the datum is something like NAD83, it does not handle state plan datums-you have to use something like ExpertGPS to first convert it to something like NAD83.

 

You can also create a map with topo, streets, hydrology, but that is more compliacted than just making the trails.

[+myotis]

Thanks for reading this...

 

I am working with the local land trust to create a trail guide for town. It is in CT - so it is hilly and forested.

 

What town? I'm nearly done mapping one section of the Clinton Land Trust sections as I skied the trails this winter (for my own use; the paper map they provide is pretty poor).

 

Almost any GPS will do what you want, though the later Garmins with the improved chipset will give better accuracy. I used a 60CSx, what software you use depends on what you want to do with the maps later.

 

You should consider stating a CT state trail map for Garmins. You get what you can from agencies/cities (many have shapfiles for trails and stuff like that), include things you GPS and then try to get others to share GPS data they have with you. As I said in the previous message once you get the map set up with the proper settings, it is real simple to add trails to it. You can also trace something in Google Earth and add it to the map. What you end up with is a transparent trail map that will show over you other maps. This is real east to do and lots of fun.

 

If you want to see an example, go to http://webpages.charter.net/jbensman/Maps.htm and download my trail maps. IL/MO is where I have the best coverage. Look around ST Louis for the vbest coverage

[yogazoo]

Almost any GPS will do what you want, though the later Garmins with the improved chipset will give better accuracy.

 

NOOOOOO! The newer units most definately do NOT give better accuracy. In fact accuracy is a major problem the new Garmin units are facing. The accuracy of the newer units is quite poor.

 

Definately use the 60CSX, you should have very accurate results. I have used both the 60CSX and the newer units. Trust me, stick with the 60CSX for accuracy.

Edited March 2, 2009 by yogazoo

[+Hrethgir]

Almost any GPS will do what you want, though the later Garmins with the improved chipset will give better accuracy.

 

NOOOOOO! The newer units most definately do NOT give better accuracy. In fact accuracy is a major problem the new Garmin units are facing. The accuracy of the newer units is quite poor.

 

Definately use the 60CSX, you should have very accurate results. I have used both the 60CSX and the newer units. Trust me, stick with the 60CSX for accuracy.

 

This is true. The eTrex series especially had lots of issues with multi-tracks and tracks being way off, especially around large bodies of water or in hilly areas. Not sure if it's as much an issue with the Colorado or Oregon. I do know from personal experience that setting a waypoint two different times on the end of a dock with my eTrex Legend HCx led to two different points out in the river, while setting a waypoint at the same time and place with my previous DeLorme PN-20 resulted in a waypoint exactly where it was supposed to be. And from what I've heard, the 60CSx is rock-solid, can't really go wrong with that one.

[FanMan]

NOOOOOO! The newer units most definately do NOT give better accuracy. In fact accuracy is a major problem the new Garmin units are facing. The accuracy of the newer units is quite poor.

 

Definately use the 60CSX, you should have very accurate results. I have used both the 60CSX and the newer units. Trust me, stick with the 60CSX for accuracy.

 

I meant the 60CSx generation, as opposed to the older non-SIRF technology. The newer ones are worse???

[yogazoo]

The newer ones are absolutly worse. And I'm talking about the Colorado and Oregon series. I've had both and the accuracy on either leaves me unfulfilled. I can't speak to the HCX series Etrex but from what I hear they have issues as well.

 

PN-20 seems to be good but I've never had one. I do know from personal experience that the 60CSX is stunningly accurate.

[+myotis]

The newer ones are absolutly worse. And I'm talking about the Colorado and Oregon series. I've had both and the accuracy on either leaves me unfulfilled. I can't speak to the HCX series Etrex but from what I hear they have issues as well.

 

PN-20 seems to be good but I've never had one. I do know from personal experience that the 60CSX is stunningly accurate.

 

When the CO first came out there were some problems with it wondering. That has been fixed. I have GPSed all kinds of trails with my CO and gone back with the map and they were right on. Here is an example of a map I made that shows my track over a trail I GPS many months earlier with my CO.

 

 

The red line is a trail and the black line is the track of where I walked. The track is narrower than the trail on the map. You can see the track is right on top of the trail. I get that type of result all the time.

[yogazoo]

How often do you get WAAS with your Colorado? I never got WAAS with mine. I always recieve WAAS corrections with the 60csx, always. The Oregon is the same way with WAAS, it just doesn't work like it's supposed to.

 

I'll say it again, The 60CSX can't be beat by anything old or new. Especially if challenged by trees or hills. There will be very few users who will disagree.

 

Not to mention the 60CSX has waypoint averaging. If you need a really good reading to mark a trailhead or something, averaging for 10 minutes will get you an extremely reliable point. The Colorado and Oregon do not have the inate ability to average waypoints.

 

If your looking for the most reliable and accurate GPS on the market today, you've found it in the 60CSX hands down.

 

You may get decent results from time to time with other models but you're taking a chance.

Edited March 3, 2009 by yogazoo

[MtnHermit]

I can't afford the backpack GPS units, so the most accurate handheld within a reasonable price range (under $600 if possible) that can create routes, and has a feature that I can record locations (like interesting geology or a nice view, wetlands, etc) would be great.

Any of the consumer GPS receiver with create tracks in GPX format which will be more than adequate for your purposes. You can get by for as little as $100. You'll notice that this thread has degenerated into which unit is more accurate. It matters not. No map user is going to critique your maps.

 

Which software should I use? My husband has used ARC view, but isn't an expert. Should we go with ARC view, or is there another software program that we can use to create accurate and professional looking maps?

Two come to mind:

Delorme's X-map, Embra has made some nice maps from GPS tracks. Perhaps he'll comment.

GlobalMapper, ~$230, can input almost any file format and output in any paper or file format. For example your can import USGS DEMs and create contour lines. GREAT user forum for questions.

 

What is your output format?

[+myotis]

How often do you get WAAS with your Colorado? I never got WAAS with mine. I always recieve WAAS corrections with the 60csx, always. The Oregon is the same way with WAAS, it just doesn't work like it's supposed to.

 

I'll say it again, The 60CSX can't be beat by anything old or new. Especially if challenged by trees or hills. There will be very few users who will disagree.

 

Not to mention the 60CSX has waypoint averaging. If you need a really good reading to mark a trailhead or something, averaging for 10 minutes will get you an extremely reliable point. The Colorado and Oregon do not have the inate ability to average waypoints.

 

If your looking for the most reliable and accurate GPS on the market today, you've found it in the 60CSX hands down.

 

You may get decent results from time to time with other models but you're taking a chance.

 

I always have a WAAS fix. That was fixed a very long time ago. I also have waypoint averaging on my CO-the system gives you much more informaiton than the 60CSX gives you when it is averaging. But for the purposes of map making, there is no need to average a waypoint. A trailhead is not like a cache, you can see it when you get close. I had a 60CSX from when it first came out to when the CO came out. There is no meaningful difference in accuracy in the two models for the purpose of map making. I have maped countless trails with both. With either unit I have gone back on the trails after I GPS them and they are always right on. Both units do an outstanding job. But the CO is much easier to use than the 60CSX and the screen is twice as big. There can always be some circumstnace when a GPS can have a problem. For example, when I was in Olympic National Park with my 60CSX in a canyon and heavy tree cover I never lost reception, but it was hundreds of feet off and bouncing all over the place.

 

On a releated point, there are freeware programs to make the topo and hydrology from USGS sources. The topo lines in the screen shot I attached were made with freeware.

[yogazoo]

If your looking for the most reliable and accurate (Garmin) GPS on the market today, you've found it in the 60CSX hands down.

[+geojibby]

I totally agree with the reports of the CSx/Cx units. They are super accurate and cheaper than the most current technology (Garmin) ~ which seems to be more geared for user-friendliness. The CX series are work horse units, a bit more technical (hence Garmin's new easier use direction), but are the best built units for accuracy. Nothing else out there compares with the sirf-iii technology & quad helix antenna. I totally recommend the GPSMAP 60CSx or the Cx version that I have for this poster's needs in creating trail maps.

[jmundinger]

You can do what you are talking about with recreation grade equipment and software. If you intend to do a lot of it, you might think about stretching your budget a little bit and get a survey grade handheld unit and software.

 

http://www.igage.com/mp/magellan_professional_gps.htm

[+embra]

I'd say the Delorme PN-40 is a good contender for this task. It comes bundled with the TopoUSA software, which is highly editable and well suited to the task (Amazon is listing at $340 today for the both of them). From what I've seen of comparisons, the PN-40 is is accurate as the 60csx, although in very hilly areas or slot canyon situations the 60csx seems to do better.

 

Take a look at the Delorme blog post where you can see a step-by-step description of what I understand your project to be.

[+randyrucker]

I like the accuracy of the PN-40. With the new firmware upgrade, its very tight. I get a WAAS lock all the time now. I think it will be good for your task.

[+Styk]

How often do you get WAAS with your Colorado? I never got WAAS with mine. I always recieve WAAS corrections with the 60csx, always. The Oregon is the same way with WAAS, it just doesn't work like it's supposed to.

 

I'll say it again, The 60CSX can't be beat by anything old or new. Especially if challenged by trees or hills. There will be very few users who will disagree.

 

Not to mention the 60CSX has waypoint averaging. If you need a really good reading to mark a trailhead or something, averaging for 10 minutes will get you an extremely reliable point. The Colorado and Oregon do not have the inate ability to average waypoints.

 

If your looking for the most reliable and accurate GPS on the market today, you've found it in the 60CSX hands down.

 

You may get decent results from time to time with other models but you're taking a chance.

 

I own both a Colorado and a 60Cx. I have to agree, the 60 series is the best. One thing I really miss on the colorado is the lack of color for tracks, they are all black. Funny that they fixed that in the oregons but left the Colorado hanging. I use the Colorado mostly for geocaching and road navigation but the 60 for every thing else.

 

Another thing, the 60 series will automatically close active tracks each day.

 

Lots of tutorials out there to show you how to use available topo data and your tracks to create maps. I use mapedit, gentyp, cGPSmaper and mapset tookit to build them. I use Inno Setup to make the maps self installing.

Edited March 3, 2009 by stickman756

[+RRLover]

I also have waypoint averaging on my CO-the system gives you much more informaiton than the 60CSX gives

you when it is averaging.

Honestly, you're not being forthright about the averaging thing on the CO, perhaps you could fill in the blanks.

Like the need to do averaging via a 'Wherigo' plugin cartridge? That's a 'hack' not a feature.

Or did Garmin actually "fix" this?

 

Norm

[+briansnat]

I do a lot of of this very thing on trails in northern NJ. You can't find a better choice for this than the 60CSX.

 

One key thing is to save your tracks to the SD card. This setting creates the tracks in GPX format which is becoming the standard among map makers.

[+myotis]

I also have waypoint averaging on my CO-the system gives you much more informaiton than the 60CSX gives

you when it is averaging.

Honestly, you're not being forthright about the averaging thing on the CO, perhaps you could fill in the blanks.

Like the need to do averaging via a 'Wherigo' plugin cartridge? That's a 'hack' not a feature.

Or did Garmin actually "fix" this?

 

Norm

 

It is the Wherigo cartidige. If I need to avg a waypoint (which is extremly rare) I can be averaging it within 5 seconds. It works and is easy to do. If you got a WAAS fix, there is very few things that you need better accuracy for. A geocache is the only thing I have felt a need to use it for.

[+myotis]

I do a lot of of this very thing on trails in northern NJ. You can't find a better choice for this than the 60CSX.

 

One key thing is to save your tracks to the SD card. This setting creates the tracks in GPX format which is becoming the standard among map makers.

 

I like keeping everything in MapSource's native format. GPSMAPEDIT works with both identically.

 

I think the track record settings are the most important issue. I have found set at automatic and most often gives the best track.

 

One thing that used to really irriate me about the 60CSX when I was using it for map making was when you stopped somewhere for a break, it was not very good at detecting that you are not moving so it puts lots of points in the track that you have to go back and delete before you use it for a map. This is much less of a problem in the CO.

 

But the 60CSX will give you a real good track just like the CO and OR.

[GeoBobC]

"One thing that used to really irriate me about the 60CSX when I was using it for map making was when you stopped somewhere for a break, it was not very good at detecting that you are not moving so it puts lots of points in the track that you have to go back and delete before you use it for a map."

 

Have you tried filtering the track in Mapsource? I frequently do that. I have mine to set to filter out track points less than 12 feet apart. You can set the distance to whatever you wish. It cleans up a track in one simple step.

[+RRLover]

myotis :

 

Waypoint averaging

Thank-you for clearing that up, seriously, I appreciate it,

as it's been awhile since I've visited the CO/OR threads.

I wasn't sure if Garmin had addressed that issue yet, or not.

 

Norm

[+dukeofurl01]

"One thing that used to really irriate me about the 60CSX when I was using it for map making was when you stopped somewhere for a break, it was not very good at detecting that you are not moving so it puts lots of points in the track that you have to go back and delete before you use it for a map."

 

Have you tried filtering the track in Mapsource? I frequently do that. I have mine to set to filter out track points less than 12 feet apart. You can set the distance to whatever you wish. It cleans up a track in one simple step.

 

Wow! How do you do that?

Edited March 5, 2009 by DukeOfURL01

[+roadrage64]

How often do you get WAAS with your Colorado? I never got WAAS with mine. I always recieve WAAS corrections with the 60csx, always. The Oregon is the same way with WAAS, it just doesn't work like it's supposed to.

 

I'll say it again, The 60CSX can't be beat by anything old or new. Especially if challenged by trees or hills. There will be very few users who will disagree.

 

Not to mention the 60CSX has waypoint averaging. If you need a really good reading to mark a trailhead or something, averaging for 10 minutes will get you an extremely reliable point. The Colorado and Oregon do not have the inate ability to average waypoints.

 

If your looking for the most reliable and accurate GPS on the market today, you've found it in the 60CSX hands down.

 

You may get decent results from time to time with other models but you're taking a chance.

 

I couldn't agree more!

[Janet78]

Garmin 60CSX it is then! After I start getting some routes, I'll figure out the mapping software possibilities. I need to be able to show the property bounderies, hopefully show only the boundary of the property and nothing outside of it. There have been so many great suggestions I really appreciate your time to get back to me. I'll start looking into your mapping suggestions shortly.

 

I typed Garmin 60CSX best price into google, and it pulled up a range of between $277 and $659 for the product: "Garmin GPSMAP 60CSx Portable / Handheld GPS" Why such the price difference? Are they all the same unit or do some have special add ons that I need to learn about?

 

Again - Thanks!

janet

[+JBnW]

I typed Garmin 60CSX best price into google, and it pulled up a range of between $277 and $659 for the product: "Garmin GPSMAP 60CSx Portable / Handheld GPS" Why such the price difference? Are they all the same unit or do some have special add ons that I need to learn about?

 

Check the GPS Garage Sale forum, or Google around a bit more. Should be able to find one cheaper than $277, and there were some insane $158 deals a couple months ago. The wide difference in price is just differing retailers, and their markups. Also, there's only one version of the GPSMAP 60CSx, unless you're seeing one bundled with mapping software and other stuff.

 

Cheers,

[+geojibby]

I typed Garmin 60CSX best price into google, and it pulled up a range of between $277 and $659 for the product: "Garmin GPSMAP 60CSx Portable / Handheld GPS" Why such the price difference? Are they all the same unit or do some have special add ons that I need to learn about?

 

I've had great experience with http://www.gpscity.ca/ There is also the US page: http://www.gpscity.com/

[+Team DeLorme]

I have to toss this into the ring, having spent an afternoon walking the trails to put together a map for a geocaching event at the Take It Outside conference held by Maine's governor last fall... I created paper handouts as well as trail data for GPS devices. Aerial imagery made it easy to relate GPS data to what was observed while gathering tracks... something to consider.

 

Making trail maps with Topo USA and the Earthmate PN-40...

 

http://blog.delorme.com/2008/10/11/making-...arthmate-pn-40/

 

Feel free to get in touch if you have any questions... good luck with your research!

 

Chip Noble

Team DeLorme