I am curious as to what people's opinions would be

[barcelonacvr]

edited due to some people thinking it was about their cave,they are wrong.

[Scott McCrea]

You mean they found an unmapped cave and they are doing a grade 3 (or is it 4) survey–with no sketching?

I think it depends on the cave. There may be times when a line plot is the best option. But if they are doing it because they are lazy, then it stinks. Doing it right the first time is a LOT easier than doing it again.

[Evan G]

Also a question would be is: What are you going to do with the data that you end up with? If you are going to make a map then the more data the better.

Something when I do a Bio samples, photo inventory, Radon Survey, or etc., I will run a plotline from existing stations for purpose of inventorying the samples.

Running a plotline can be good practice in surveying, but otherwise unless you are going for a purpose of creating a data set or a comparative data set. It seems that it would be a waste of time.

I've always have been taught to take the time and do it right the first time. With mapping that is so true, I hate going back a cleaning up a botched survey.

[cob]

ok, swimming against the stream here...

some data, is better than no data. We can all get up on our high horses and cast stones at those who don't hold themselves to the same standards as we (I wonder how many can match me? how many can I match up with?)

If they do nothing more than a line plot, at least we know where it ends up at. Not enuf for you? Go back and do it yourself.

tom

[Evan G]

Sorry,

We have cold caves (34-55deg) here and only a four or five month caving season. Alpine caving environment tells me that I don't want to resurvey the likes of the Grim crawl of Death in Great X. There is some survey by B-52 falls that I want to do in Great X and when I go into to survey, I want to do it the best I can. Because later down the road I don't want to deal with some pissy cold cavers telling me that the cave goes, but the data need major tweaking.

I found that one of problems with any volunteer organization is that some standards are just as volunteer. So do what you want because the mind is a terrible thing to volunteer. Further up stream.

Cave On, Lights Off;
Evan

[Aaron Addison]

ok, swimming against the stream here...

If they do nothing more than a line plot, at least we know where it ends up at. Not enuf for you? Go back and do it yourself.

tom

Tom-

I was with you up until your last sentence. Doesn't your statement assume that the cave can tolerate the traffic of another survey crew slathering about?

Why impact the cave twice (or more)?

AA

[Evan G]

Very good point!!! AA

[NZcaver]

Doesn't your statement assume that the cave can tolerate the traffic of another survey crew slathering about?

Why impact the cave twice (or more)?

Not to twist your logic or anything, but what makes you think a second survey crew is going to impact the cave more than any number of tourist trips (or other projects) will? I agree with minimizing impact whenever possible, and striving to "do it once, do it right" - but there are rare situations when a survey needs to be conducted faster than usual because of safety concerns. Like surveying under a freezing waterfall or through a Grim Crawl of Death, for example.

[fuzzy-hair-man]

Why impact the cave twice (or more)?

Very good point and an exhaustive survey (all leads checked thoughly and mapped) can be used to justify why well intentioned cavers shouldn't push that branch and damage the cave more as a result. They can see that there is nothing down there from the map, providing they can have confidence in the survey and that all leads would have been exhaustively pushed.

On the other hand telling people that thier sureying efforts are not good enough is a very quick way to discourage them and the more people power available the better.

Perhaps you could explain all the advantages of a more complete and exhaustive survey and they can make up thier own mind. If the cave is sensitive maybe then push the issue further.

[Teresa]

Say some people have gained some location data and they seem to only want to run from one spot to another doing line surveys not true surveys.

what is anyone's opinion in this?

It all depends why they are doing the survey. Some people (primarily surveyors) seem to think the only reason to go into a cave is to make maps.
While the map makers are most welcome to their activity, a)not all people are surveyors, (maybe they are photographers, or geologists or merely recreational cavers) b) there are many reasons to enter a cave beyond making maps and c) maybe a cave doesn't need to be mapped at all, since mapping a cave brings it undue attention.

If the people are just making a Hansel and Gretel study, because they want to know the way out, or to provide a line map for future rescue purposes, all the fancy cartography is just that--fancy cartography.


I too am rather fed up with 'fancy mappers' who are always redoing other's good work. After all, if you've got the distance and bearing correct,
and you've got the walls and any hazards traced out fairly well, the rest of it is gingerbread. I know some folks who have been working their butts off, and were just told, "go away, we don't want your stuff" because it's not up to some imagined gold standard. All that does is breed discontent and lack of cooperation.

In the case cited, I might first ask why these people are doing the fast mapping (perhaps the cave is under a death sentence) and if newbies, work with them to make sure their maps are accurate.

The first thing you learn in academic cartography is 'first you figure out why you want to make a map in the first place.' Then you ask, who will use the map. Then you proceed accordingly.

Mapping is an art form, after all--you know when something is well done, but I haven't seen any real uniform standards (except accuracy) in 20 years.

[barcelonacvr]

edited due to some people thinking it was about their cave,they are wrong.

[barcelonacvr]

[quote="Teresa"][quote="eramosakarst"]

edited due to some people thinking it was about their cave,they are wrong.

[NZcaver]

...The caves have no problem whatsoever having "proper" survey done...I am not talking about a Micheal Angelo either but at least some sketch and details.

Based on the information you've provided (and not knowing the caves personally), I tend to agree with you. At least sketch in the walls, basic floor detail, and any major features. Do it once, do it right...

[Teresa]

...The caves have no problem whatsoever having "proper" survey done...I am not talking about a Micheal Angelo either but at least some sketch and details.

Based on the information you've provided (and not knowing the caves personally), I tend to agree with you. At least sketch in the walls, basic floor detail, and any major features. Do it once, do it right...

I know people who have 'done it once, done it right' and then some hotshot comes by, redo the work (to no greater accuracy) and then run around condemning the prior mappers. Idiots...

Sounds like, if it is a maze cave, the maps are being done for route finding, not for artistic or scientific reasons. This can be very useful in maze caves.

[batrotter]

I could see where a line plot would be very useful if the cave only had a 2D paper map. The paper map could be used in conjunction with a lineplot for GIS purposes.

ESRI GIS software will now import data from COMPASS to generate 3D shape files. Of course a line plot survey would still need LRUD to establish a 3D file. The shape file would be on one layer and the 2D map could be on another layer. They could be toggled on and off to view how a cave would trend. The 3D shape fiel would also allow you to see how deep the cave is with a DEM layer.