Discussion: Remapping

The next move would be a complete redraw; the right-hand/eastern ridge is about 150m out of position when compared to the rest of this map snippet.

For future events it would be worth mapping this section and the areas south of it for 1:7500 use.

And there Rob you have the strategic question for the sport in Australia. The new ISOM continues the requirement of mapping at 1:15k. But this now comes with objective measures of minimum separation, minimum lengths for line features, minimum areas for area features, minimum curvatures and a strict requirement for no changes to the size of cartographic objects. And there is now digital testing to enforce this at a minimum for IOF events. This map does not come near passing such tests. A few examples. Compare the size of the two pits north of control 14. The tags on embankments around control 15 have different lengths. The dot knolls around control 13 touch the contour line. The small side gullies to the west of control 14 have an over tight radius.At the broken red line between the start and control 1 the pit is too small and the contour line segment is less than the minimum distance. In making these observations I am not criticising the mappers. Such deviations from specification have been part and parcel of the mapping of our mining terrain as long as I have been in the sport. Now here is the problem. Remapping a complex area like this is expensive (unless you can find a volunteer with multiple weeks of free time they are willing to donate). The only way to pay for this mapping is to use the map at a major carnival. But for it to be used at a WRE at the carnival it would need to be greatly generalised. To map with the current detail for an Australian championship event we would need to write the National rules to differ from the IOF rules. If we stick to the current IOF rules and mainatin the current detail in the map, then the highest level of event available for this map would be a State event. That is never going to pay for remapping. Some comment smade to me from othe rmappers about this conumdrum.
"Why was Nerrina fine for a World Cup in the 1990s but unacceptable now? ".
"Years of work went into the new specification. We need to accept the findings and apply the specification"
"We need to forcefully advocate to the IOF for mapping at 1:10,000 for Middle Distance events".
As you can see from these three comments there are some issues to discuss.