[AndrewRJ]

I think that splitting the trail maps into several segments would be the easiest way to handle the increased size issues. I know that the likelyhood of me hiking in Idaho is very small and most likely wouldn't need the maps.

My larger concern is the possibility of bad data.

You indicated that there are several areas in Idaho where the trails are "gone" does that mean rerouted, abandoned?

I know that we should never be totally dependent on our GPS's but several longer loop hikes could be really affected if a trail that you though existed really doesn't.

Also, I am suprized that we don't have highly accurate data in Tolt MacDonald. Maybe a trail mapping event should be in the works. I know that Prying Pandora was thinking of something similer in another area.

[Dgwphotos]

Just a note for Magellan users, I've found a way to make custom maps, but I've had some problems with an trial map, so stay tuned. I found out how to combine saved tracks, but haven't been able to get them to show up on the GPS.

[Isonzo Karst]

RE Magellan and eXplorist.

Per eraseek's post - if you can get the trail set into your software, then save as a .gpx, you can use GPS Babel to convert a .gpx to a Magellan track file - .log

[Moun10Bike]

Okay, the new version is up that corrects the projection issue. (FYI, the issue wasn't what I thought it was, but was due to the fact that the default projection settings in my software changed after rebuilding my laptop.) The full (and short) change list for version 1.04:

• Corrected projection issue
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of FunnyNose:
  • Salmon Creek Ravine

Download is available from the Northwest Trails page.

[Dgwphotos]

Isonzo Karst, on Apr 21 2008, 10:08 AM, said:

RE Magellan and eXplorist.

Per eraseek's post - if you can get the trail set into your software, then save as a .gpx, you can use GPS Babel to convert a .gpx to a Magellan track file - .log

Thanks! It took a bit of working, but I got it to show up.

[MarcusArelius]

I think it's great to have all the new trail data!

Having something (even if the quality is suspect) is better than having nothing. I say we all just need to get out and validate it.

I like the trail mapping events idea. Yes, they could be events since the main purpose would not be to find caches. Of course if you happened to walk by one.... or two....

I also think segmenting the data would be good if it was easy to do. I assume it would work the same way as City Navigator does. I have plenty of storage space but it still takes time to reload as the updates come out (not that I mind).

[Moun10Bike]

AndrewRJ, on Apr 21 2008, 09:59 AM, said:

My larger concern is the possibility of bad data.

You indicated that there are several areas in Idaho where the trails are "gone" does that mean rerouted, abandoned?

I know that we should never be totally dependent on our GPS's but several longer loop hikes could be really affected if a trail that you though existed really doesn't.

Also, I am suprized that we don't have highly accurate data in Tolt MacDonald. Maybe a trail mapping event should be in the works. I know that Prying Pandora was thinking of something similer in another area.

The trails in the FSGeodata Clearinghouse seem to match almost exactly the trails (including abandoned railroads and some dirt roads) shown on USGS topo maps. That's great when you you are talking thoroughness of coverage, but as we all know most of the USGS topo maps are extremely outdated these days.

The trails I mentioned as "gone" are ones that have been abandoned and have been mostly reclaimed by nature. An example that I spotted in the Priest Lake area was the trail up to Squaw Mountain and the Wigwams. However, in some cases the trails shown have been rehabilitated and recovered. An example in the Priest Lake area is the Two Mouth Lakes Trail (the western approach from the lake).

A benefit I saw in the FSGeodata Clearinghouse data is that it includes areas around the NF lands, while the data off of the NFS main site stops at the forest borders. Also, since many of the forests have not put any GIS data of any sort up on their official sites, the Clearinghouse data includes all forests and thus helps fill in those areas in which other data is not yet available.

Overall, I saw it a benefit to add the Clearinghouse data, which is why I spent as much time as I did integrating it (it takes a lot of work to pull in the data and then try to weed out that data that duplicates better data from other sources, especially when you are talking the 90000+ segments of trails that are now included in the mapset). Perhaps coloring the non-GPS data with a different type style would help, but then I worry that the styles will become too large and confusing. No point needing to carry a legend card around with with you to figure out a trail type!

I'll throw together some ideas for breaking out the map into smaller tiles and post them here later for feedback.

[AndrewRJ]

Moun10Bike, on Apr 21 2008, 12:45 PM, said:

AndrewRJ, on Apr 21 2008, 09:59 AM, said:

My larger concern is the possibility of bad data.

You indicated that there are several areas in Idaho where the trails are "gone" does that mean rerouted, abandoned?

I know that we should never be totally dependent on our GPS's but several longer loop hikes could be really affected if a trail that you though existed really doesn't.

Also, I am suprized that we don't have highly accurate data in Tolt MacDonald. Maybe a trail mapping event should be in the works. I know that Prying Pandora was thinking of something similer in another area.

The trails I mentioned as "gone" are ones that have been abandoned and have been mostly reclaimed by nature. An example that I spotted in the Priest Lake area was the trail up to Squaw Mountain and the Wigwams. However, in some cases the trails shown have been rehabilitated and recovered. An example in the Priest Lake area is the Two Mouth Lakes Trail (the western approach from the lake).

That being the case I would say throw everything in. A trail reclaimed by nature is still usually a trail with lots of overgrowth. That answers my question.

This post has been edited by AndrewRJ: 21 April 2008 - 01:54 PM

[Lightning Jeff]

Moun10Bike, on Apr 21 2008, 12:45 PM, said:

Perhaps coloring the non-GPS data with a different type style would help, but then I worry that the styles will become too large and confusing.

This gets my vote. The great value I see in this project is knowing that someone has walked the route with a GPS. We know that the data is accurate, the trail really does exist, more or less in the location indicated. So, I really would like to see the "suspect" (not verified via GPS track) portions in a different color. Two different colors doesn't seem too confusing to me, but I see real value in distinguishing this data from what you collect via real tracks.

Just so you know, I haven't decided what's cooler - this project or the caching features of the Garmin Colorado. I think this project has the edge. It is turning into an amazing resource. While doing some suburban caching yesterday, I was surprised to see a nice little red trail show up. It confirmed the proper approach to a cache that I might have otherwise ignored. Way cool.

Edit: Okay, three colors - my eyes are so bad that I'd never noticed there was a maroon set distinct from red. Wow.

This post has been edited by Lightning Jeff: 21 April 2008 - 02:04 PM

[Moun10Bike]

Here's my first attempt at a regional/tile breakdown. Thoughts?

[Moun10Bike]

Lightning Jeff, on Apr 21 2008, 03:02 PM, said:

Moun10Bike, on Apr 21 2008, 12:45 PM, said:

Perhaps coloring the non-GPS data with a different type style would help, but then I worry that the styles will become too large and confusing.

This gets my vote.

Any suggestions (or additional opinions) on colors/styles to implement?

[Lightning Jeff]

Moun10Bike, on Apr 21 2008, 04:16 PM, said:

Here's my first attempt at a regional/tile breakdown. Thoughts?

Looks good to me - probably more logical than by state.

I had to share this. I don't know if anyone else does this, but I use my Nuvi to navigate to trailheads, then my Colorado from there. It just now occurred to me that I could probably load these trail maps on the Nuvi as well - yup! They show up great, including the trailhead POIs - most valuable.

[AndrewRJ]

Moun10Bike, on Apr 21 2008, 04:16 PM, said:

Here's my first attempt at a regional/tile breakdown. Thoughts?

where does the line between western Wa and inland fall. Or what region does Wenatchee and Leavenworth fall onto.

I am just trying to get an idea where that line is.

[shutle64]

AndrewRJ, on Apr 21 2008, 07:11 PM, said:

Moun10Bike, on Apr 21 2008, 04:16 PM, said:

Here's my first attempt at a regional/tile breakdown. Thoughts?

where does the line between western Wa and inland fall. Or what region does Wenatchee and Leavenworth fall onto.

I am just trying to get an idea where that line is.

It looks like it follows the county lines and some of the Columbia River at certain points.

[hydnsek]

shutle64, on Apr 21 2008, 10:46 PM, said:

AndrewRJ, on Apr 21 2008, 07:11 PM, said:

Moun10Bike, on Apr 21 2008, 04:16 PM, said:

Here's my first attempt at a regional/tile breakdown. Thoughts?

where does the line between western Wa and inland fall. Or what region does Wenatchee and Leavenworth fall onto.

I am just trying to get an idea where that line is.

It looks like it follows the county lines and some of the Columbia River at certain points.

Agreement. AndrewRJ - Wenatchee and Leavenworth fall into the Western WA portion (good for us!).

[Moun10Bike]

Yep, it's counties. However, I'm thinking that I might be saving myself a lot of work if I instead simply break things up along a grid.

[MarcusArelius]

Moun10Bike, on Apr 22 2008, 09:18 AM, said:

Yep, it's counties. However, I'm thinking that I might be saving myself a lot of work if I instead simply break things up along a grid.

I like the size and general boudaries. Delimiting by county or grid line will not matter to me. Folks near a boundary will end up loading two tiles anyway.

Did I say thank you this week?

[EraSeek]

I'm sure there are good reasons, but why not tile by state. I would understand that better and be more aware of what I've input.

I like the mapping event concept.

[SiliconFiend]

EraSeek, on Apr 22 2008, 07:49 PM, said:

I like the mapping event concept.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Ma...g_Weekend_Howto

[popop]

Upon close examination of my area (Coos County, OR) I can see what I think are the result of the "buffering out" of old forest roads etc. - that being "trail" segments (some pretty small) that I know to be old road beds that nature has reclaimed.

My real questions here is how you'd like folks like myself that intend to field validate trail segments and/or document missing trails. I was going to just start from my HOME coords and work outwards. I don't see any easy way to report "such-n-such segment should be deleted - old abandoned road" situations. Maybe you don't intend to remove them from your map but simply to attribute them as to their current condition?

If there were a way to throw these segments up on something like Google Earth (I also have access to ArcView) it would really help to validate them. As it is, I have to keep toggling between map layers in MapSource. [Edited to clarify - I'm only speaking of sitting at home on the PC]

Here's an example close to my home - N43 22.974, W124 15.844 marks the north end of a "trail" segment that really doesn't exist anymore. US Topo calls it a "Trail" or "Pack Trail". It's neither a developed trail nor a navigitable road. Is this the kind of feedback you want?

This post has been edited by popop: 23 April 2008 - 09:20 AM

[SiliconFiend]

popop, on Apr 23 2008, 09:49 AM, said:

My real questions here is how you'd like folks like myself that intend to field validate trail segments and/or document missing trails. I was going to just start from my HOME coords and work outwards. I don't see any easy way to report "such-n-such segment should be deleted - old abandoned road" situations. Maybe you don't intend to remove them from your map but simply to attribute them as to their current condition?

I appreciate these free map projects undertaken by dedicated individuals but this is the reason why I encourage people to use OpenStreetMap. If you see a problem, you can fix it yourself and then you and everyone else can benefit. Check out mkgmap for creating Garmin maps from OSM data. Other projects are in the works, too.

[Moun10Bike]

SiliconFiend, I appreciate your enthusiasm for OSM, but I would ask that you please stop proselytizing in this thread. Start a separate thread for that subject.

[Moun10Bike]

popop, on Apr 23 2008, 09:49 AM, said:

Upon close examination of my area (Coos County, OR) I can see what I think are the result of the "buffering out" of old forest roads etc. - that being "trail" segments (some pretty small) that I know to be old road beds that nature has reclaimed.

My real questions here is how you'd like folks like myself that intend to field validate trail segments and/or document missing trails. I was going to just start from my HOME coords and work outwards. I don't see any easy way to report "such-n-such segment should be deleted - old abandoned road" situations. Maybe you don't intend to remove them from your map but simply to attribute them as to their current condition?

If there were a way to throw these segments up on something like Google Earth (I also have access to ArcView) it would really help to validate them. As it is, I have to keep toggling between map layers in MapSource. [Edited to clarify - I'm only speaking of sitting at home on the PC]

Here's an example close to my home - N43 22.974, W124 15.844 marks the north end of a "trail" segment that really doesn't exist anymore. US Topo calls it a "Trail" or "Pack Trail". It's neither a developed trail nor a navigitable road. Is this the kind of feedback you want?

Yes, that's great feedback! You can point out segments like you just did, or take a screenshot of the maps in MapSource and mark them up to send to me, or whatever works best for you. Another option would be to open the map in MapSource and create waypoints with notes at each trail segment that you are commenting on, then send me a GPX file of those waypoints.

I have removed the segment that you note above. It was from FSGeodata Clearinghouse, and I won't plan on ever reintegrating the data from that site again unless they have a major and thorough overhaul of the data.

[popop]

Moun10Bike, on Apr 23 2008, 10:55 AM, said:

popop, on Apr 23 2008, 09:49 AM, said:

Upon close examination of my area (Coos County, OR) I can see what I think are the result of the "buffering out" of old forest roads etc. - that being "trail" segments (some pretty small) that I know to be old road beds that nature has reclaimed.

My real questions here is how you'd like folks like myself that intend to field validate trail segments and/or document missing trails. I was going to just start from my HOME coords and work outwards. I don't see any easy way to report "such-n-such segment should be deleted - old abandoned road" situations. Maybe you don't intend to remove them from your map but simply to attribute them as to their current condition?

If there were a way to throw these segments up on something like Google Earth (I also have access to ArcView) it would really help to validate them. As it is, I have to keep toggling between map layers in MapSource. [Edited to clarify - I'm only speaking of sitting at home on the PC]

Here's an example close to my home - N43 22.974, W124 15.844 marks the north end of a "trail" segment that really doesn't exist anymore. US Topo calls it a "Trail" or "Pack Trail". It's neither a developed trail nor a navigitable road. Is this the kind of feedback you want?

Yes, that's great feedback! You can point out segments like you just did, or take a screenshot of the maps in MapSource and mark them up to send to me, or whatever works best for you. Another option would be to open the map in MapSource and create waypoints with notes at each trail segment that you are commenting on, then send me a GPX file of those waypoints.

I have removed the segment that you note above. It was from FSGeodata Clearinghouse, and I won't plan on ever reintegrating the data from that site again unless they have a major and thorough overhaul of the data.

Okay - I'll get started as I described and will use the email address you requested as per your Switchbacks directions ......... let the validation begin........

[Moun10Bike]

I just finished posting a new release of Northwest Trails (v 1.05) that involves two fairly significant changes:

• Added a background map so you can more easily locate a specific trail
  
• Broke the data out into six separate map tiles

I elected to break things out by state since it was simply easier to do and would make it easier for people to know offhand where the breaks are (even though state borders are often not the most logical delineation). The problem with this, as I discovered, is that it causes overlapping selection rectangles in Mapsource. The software apparently doesn't like this, so the selection rectangles are appearing quite undersized and tucked into the upper left or lower left corner of the state each covers. This only appears to be a visual problem in Mapsource, however, as in testing on my Colorado the entire data content for each state appears to be successfully downloading into the unit. I will start looking into solutions for this; one would be to pony up for the more expensive version of the map creation software that allows for irregular map bounds, and a cheaper one would be to break the data out into a regular rectangular grid.

Overall, the download size for version 1.05 has jumped to 14.3 MB from 8.1 MB for version 1.04, but that is virtually all due to the inclusion of a background map. Below is a list of the current sizes of the map tiles by state. Note that even the biggest is a fraction of the 9+ MB that the single map tile in version 1.04 came to, so people should be able to pick and choose what data they want and have a much smaller impact on their map memory now.

• BC: 24 KB
  
• ID: 3.34 MB
  
• MT: 2.85 MB
  
• OR: 1.55 MB
  
• WA: 2.01 MB
  
• WY: 1.38 MB

Here is the complete list of changes in version 1.05:

• Broke trail data into six separate map tiles by state/province
  (Note that the software doesn't seem to like the overlapping map selection boxes that result from this, which is causing the selection boxes to appear vastly undersized and placed in the upper or lower left corner of the state that each covers. In my tests on my Colorado, however, all of the data for each state is getting succesfully downloaded to the unit even though the bounding boxes don't appear to cover the entire extent of the data.)
  
• Added background map to help with location and orientation
  
• Corrected some trail names in the Redmond Watershed
  
• Removed a trail on Radar Hill near Coos Bay, Oregon that was confirmed by popop as no longer present
  
• Added GPS data:
  • Keeney Neighborhood Park (Bellevue, WA)
    
  • Powerline trail leading into Bridal Trails State Park (WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of FunnyNose:
  • Lincoln Park (Seattle, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of dsvaughn:
  • Klahanie neighborhood trails near Horse Lake (Sammamish, WA)

Download is available from the Northwest Trails page

[EraSeek]

Thanks for all your work. Seems to me the simplest and most satisfactory would just do a rectangle grid that approxiates the states in a couple of pieces. Each state might loose some to another state, but you being from Idaho have probably had designs on Montana anywho

Whatever works for you works for me. I'm just happy to have the trails and be able to add to the data. Personally I don't even need the background map (though others might perfer it).

[EraSeek]

OK, I guess the background map is pretty nice to have. : )

[Moun10Bike]

I solved the issue of the undersized selection squares in MapSource (apparently it is due to a software bug, but one easily corrected by handling the data a certain way). I have released version 1.06 primarily to correct that, but also to include some data that has come in in the past couple of days. Here is the full change list:

• Corrected issue of undersized selection rectangles in MapSource
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of shutle64:
  • Chamna Natural Preserve (Richland, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of The Jester:
  • Briscoe Park (Kent, WA)
    
  • Paved trail in the North Kent Valley (WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of MarcusArelius:
  • Grand Ridge neighborhood trails (Issaquah, WA)
    
  • Lower Grand Ridge trails (Issaquah, WA)

Download is available from the Northwest Trails page

This post has been edited by Moun10Bike: 28 April 2008 - 08:59 AM

[The Jester]

Moun10Bike, on Apr 26 2008, 10:55 PM, said:

Download is available from the Northwest Trails page

You have a minor error in the link: "www/switchbacks.com". I corrected it in the quote.

[Moun10Bike]

The Jester, on Apr 27 2008, 09:40 PM, said:

You have a minor error in the link: "www/switchbacks.com". I corrected it in the quote.

Thanks! I've fixed it in the original post now as well.

[Moun10Bike]

Northwest Trails v1.07 has been posted. The changes in this build are:

• Fixed display of road labels in background map
  
• Removed snow-only trails (XC skiing and snowmobile) in the Gifford Pinchot and Wenatchee National Forests (WA)
  
• Removed paved trail in Pierce County shown following ferry route
  
• Added trail data for Whistler, BC from maps available at Whistler.com (thanks to Raman Sarin for directing me to this site):
  • Whistler Bike Trails
    
  • Whistler Mountain Bike Park
    
  • Lost Lake
    
  • Interpretive Forest
    
  • Valley Trail
  
  
• Made some corrections to errors pointed out by MarcusArelius:
  • Adjusted trail surface type for some Mercer Slough trails (Bellevue, WA)
    
  • Corrected some Grand Ridge trails (Issaquah, WA)
    
  • Corrected some extraneous points along the Annette Lake Trail (Snoqualmie Pass, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of Raman Sarin:
  • Additional trail and some refinement in Soaring Eagle Park (Sammamish, WA)
    
  • Additional trails and further refinement in South Seatac Park (Seatac, WA)
    
  • Refinement of Tolt-MacDonald Park trails (Carnation, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of thebudman:
  • Additional trail in High Drive Parkway (Spokane, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of snowghost:
  • Hog Lake Trail (Fishtrap, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of The Jester:
  • Dirt road coverted into trail off of Monster Road in Tukwila, WA
    
  • Springbrook Trail (Tukwila, WA)
    
  • Waterworks Garden (Tukwila, WA)
    
  • Black River Riparian Forest (Tukwila, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of FunnyNose:
  • Fauntleroy Park [complete] (Seattle, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of EraSeek:
  • Log Cabin Reach Natural Area (Issaquah, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of shutle64:
  • Additional data for Chamna Natural Preserve (Richland, WA)
    
  • Bateman Island (Richland, WA)

Download is available from the Northwest Trails page

[The Jester]

A question for the reviewers in the region these maps cover: Can we place a link to the map page on caches that are along these trails? This could be a real help to many cache hunters (not all of them read the forums), but there is that donation button on the page (so it may fall under the commerical guidelines). Or should/could we place a link to this forum thread?

[hydnsek]

The Jester, on May 1 2008, 09:37 PM, said:

A question for the reviewers in the region these maps cover: Can we place a link to the map page on caches that are along these trails? This could be a real help to many cache hunters (not all of them read the forums), but there is that donation button on the page (so it may fall under the commerical guidelines). Or should/could we place a link to this forum thread?

GREAT idea, and question!

[The Jester]

I refered the question to Groundspeak, I'll let you know what answer I get.

[Moun10Bike]

Northwest Trails v1.08 has been posted. The changes in this build are:

• Corrected numerous trail names and edited ALL CAPS names to Proper Caps (WA, ID, OR, MT, WY)
  
• Removed a portion of road from Taylor Mountain (WA) that dsvaughn reported has been reclaimed
  
• Fleshed out some of the roads and trails in the Snoqualmie Tree Farm:
  • Griffin Creek
    
  • Tokul West
    
  • Tokul East
  
  
• Added trail data available from maps on the City of Bellingham web site:
  • Bay to Baker Trail and Little Squalicum Park Map
    
  • Civic Field Complex and Civic Trail Map
    
  • Cornwall Park Trails and Bug Lake Trail Map
    
  • Downtown Trails
    
  • Interurban Trail Map
    
  • Lake Padden Park Map
    
  • Larrabee and Fairhaven Park Trails
    
  • Railroad Trail Map
    
  • Sehome Hill Arboretum Trail Map
    
  • South Bay Trail
    
  • Whatcom Creek Trail (West) Map
    
  • Whatcom Falls Park and Whatcom Creek Trail (East) Map
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of The Jester:
  • Northern portion of Soos Creek Trail (Kent, WA)
    
  • Another portion of a paved trail in the North Kent Valley (WA)
    
  • Des Moines Park (Des Moines/South Seatac, WA)
    
  • Some trails in Whatcom Falls Park (Bellingham, WA)
    
  • Some trails in Sehome Hill Arboretum (Bellingham, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of EraSeek:
  • Spencer Island (Everett, WA)
    
  • Cherry Hill DNR/Hunting area (Duvall, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of Raman Sarin:
  • Additional data for South SeaTac Park (WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of dsvaughn:
  • Nature Conservancy Trail (Kitsap Peninsula, WA)
    
  • Yellow Lake Loop Trail (Issaquah, WA)
    
  • Some Snoqualmie Ridge trails (Snoqualmie, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of FunnyNose and MarcusArelius:
  • West Duwamish Greenbelt (Seattle, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of FunnyNose:
  • Burton Acres (Vashon Island, WA)
    
  • Christiansen Pond (Vashon Island, WA)
    
  • Maury Island (Vashon Island, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of Allanon:
  • Lake Tye
    
  • Trail leading east from Lake Tye
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of monkey360:
  • Refinements of Samish Overlook, Samish Bay Connection, Oyster Dome, Talus and Rock Trails on Blanchard Mountain (near Bellingham, WA)
  
  
• Added GPS data courtesy of Forty-n-Eight:
  • Eastern portion of Three Forks Natural Area (North Bend, WA)

Download is available from the Northwest Trails page

[FunnyNose]

The Jester, on May 6 2008, 09:26 AM, said:

I refered the question to Groundspeak, I'll let you know what answer I get.

I just got a cache published referencing his page
Cache

[EraSeek]

And I got my Mapping Spencer Island published with a link to this topic.

[hydnsek]

FunnyNose, on May 6 2008, 06:22 PM, said:

The Jester, on May 6 2008, 09:26 AM, said:

I refered the question to Groundspeak, I'll let you know what answer I get.

I just got a cache published referencing his page
Cache

Yeah, but look who the reviewer was.

Seriously, I plan to publish some new caches on back trails in Cougar after my vacation, and referencing the NW Trails page (not this topic) would be ideal.

[The Jester]

I just got a reply from MissJenn. She said a "gentle suggestion and link" would be OK for caches on one of the trails, though a link to this forum might be better as it supplies some context.

[Dgwphotos]

hydnsek, on May 6 2008, 07:14 PM, said:

Seriously, I plan to publish some new caches on back trails in Cougar after my vacation, and referencing the NW Trails page (not this topic) would be ideal.

Time to activate my Cougar Mountain Notifications!

Not that there is a possibility for FTF for me.

[hydnsek]

Dwoodford, on May 6 2008, 09:49 PM, said:

hydnsek, on May 6 2008, 07:14 PM, said:

Seriously, I plan to publish some new caches on back trails in Cougar after my vacation, and referencing the NW Trails page (not this topic) would be ideal.

Time to activate my Cougar Mountain Notifications!

Not that there is a possibility for FTF for me.

Hey, I gotta give folks a reason to come back to the rescheduled Cougar Mountain CITO v2. They aren't signing up like they did for SnoCITO, so maybe new caches will reel them in.

[EraSeek]

I just want to say how much I'm enjoying this! I enjoy doing some mapping and feeling useful and enjoying how useful the maps are when I am in an area I don't know. I am also amazed how much is in there now.
Thanks to the map contributers and to the awesome Moun10Bike! "He's a god!"~Kodak's 4

This post has been edited by EraSeek: 07 May 2008 - 01:59 PM

[Forty-n-Eight]

EraSeek, on May 7 2008, 02:54 PM, said:

I just want to say how much I'm enjoying this! I enjoy doing some mapping and feeling useful and enjoying how useful the maps are when I am in an area I don't know. I am also amazed how much is in there now.
Thanks to the map contributers and to the awesome Moun10Bike! "He's a god!"~Kodak's 4

I second that emotion.

[Dgwphotos]

Forty-n-Eight, on May 7 2008, 03:28 PM, said:

EraSeek, on May 7 2008, 02:54 PM, said:

I just want to say how much I'm enjoying this! I enjoy doing some mapping and feeling useful and enjoying how useful the maps are when I am in an area I don't know. I am also amazed how much is in there now.
Thanks to the map contributers and to the awesome Moun10Bike! "He's a god!"~Kodak's 4

I second that emotion.

There's a reason I consider Mount10Bike the First Cacher Of Washington! (In the sense of The First Lady)

[Moun10Bike]

Wow, you guys are way too generous (but thank you)!

[The Jester]

EraSeek, on May 7 2008, 02:54 PM, said:

I just want to say how much I'm enjoying this! I enjoy doing some mapping and feeling useful and enjoying how useful the maps are when I am in an area I don't know. I am also amazed how much is in there now.
Thanks to the map contributers and to the awesome Moun10Bike! "He's a god!"~Kodak's 4

I've been having a blast. It's encouraging me to get more exercise - and I've found out where some trails end up, in some of the oddest places... Thank you, Moun10Bike!

[Moun10Bike]

I've been toying with the idea of adding Alaska to the mapset, since I get up there somewhat frequently to fish with my family, etc. What do people think? Is that more than you want in a mapset, or would you like the additional data? Any Alaskans want to weigh in?

[intolerable]

Forty-n-Eight, on May 7 2008, 03:28 PM, said:

EraSeek, on May 7 2008, 02:54 PM, said:

I just want to say how much I'm enjoying this! I enjoy doing some mapping and feeling useful and enjoying how useful the maps are when I am in an area I don't know. I am also amazed how much is in there now.
Thanks to the map contributers and to the awesome Moun10Bike! "He's a god!"~Kodak's 4

I second that emotion.

This project has no doubt saved me from myself several times already... thanks much!

This post has been edited by intolerable: 08 May 2008 - 06:56 PM

[intolerable]

Moun10Bike, on May 8 2008, 07:52 PM, said:

I've been toying with the idea of adding Alaska to the mapset, since I get up there somewhat frequently to fish with my family, etc. What do people think? Is that more than you want in a mapset, or would you like the additional data? Any Alaskans want to weigh in?

While I'm not a major contributor or anything, I personally really enjoy as much data as possible. And that's not just because I'm going to Alaska next year...

[Babybackpackers]

I have a lot of family that lives in Alaska. It would make their day if they had trail maps. They might even have a few of their own to put in. More trails the better. As long as it doesn't overload you. It also give me one more reason to go up and visit.