CompuServe Messages

Doug, De Lorme's maps on CD may be a vast improvment over the useability of the the USGS raw data, but De Lorme's maps on CD are not really exciting and useable. A fold up standard highway map is as useable and may have more data (don't know haven't seen any of the CD maps). My thoughts of useability of USGS data was of those maps that are really specifica and useable–the 7.5 min topoa, geologic maps, and 1:100,000 scale maps. Who else covers the US (and some of the rest of the world) with such things? Who else takes any USGS data and publishes it in a better more useable format than the GS? Congress could possibly cut USGS funds with the idea of getting rid of the "useless" work that helps with general geologica studies and ore deposits. Afterall, what does this country need with mineral production? Apparently none of VP Gore's friends use minerals/metals. But, who is going to do the geologic hazard studies which are becoming much more important to local land use planning these days? Who is going to do the earthquake studies? Who is going to do the volcanic hazard studies? These are things that are very much on the minds of major political leaders in cities and states. Remember, all things mentioned at this stage of the game for budget cuts are just ideas–many proposals are made before the individual proposing such and such has really studied the worth of an agency. Also contrary to your apparent feelings–I still find paper copies of maps as most useful. I do not care to read most of my books or maps on a computer or carry a laptop into the field with me (especially hiking/backpacking). The data on CD would be great, but if I had a choice of one only, it would be paper maps. Lanny