scale, Compilation, and generalization 77
I dumped my pack and searched through it for my trail map. . . . [The maps ] vary some-
what, but most are on an abysmal scale of 1:100,000, which ludicrously compresses
every kilometer of real world into a mere centimeter of map. Imagine a square kilometer
of physical landscape and all that it might contain—logging roads, streams, a mountain-
top or two, perhaps a fire tower, a knob or grassy bald, the wandering AT [Appalachian
Trail], and maybe a pair of important side trails—and imagine trying to convey all that
information on an area the size of the nail on your little finger. (pp. 73–74)
Bryson’s frustration clearly shows the necessity of considering user needs when choos-
ing scale. To Bryson, the hiker, the details of the trail he was following were vital to
his survival and a scale of 1:100,000 wasn’t sufficient.
On the other hand, for a map
user who wants to get a broad overview of the length of the Appalachian Trail, the
states it covers,
and its general location, a scale of 1:100,000 is far too large.
The resolution or detail of the data represented also is of importance in choosing
a map scale. If a great deal of detail must be represented, then the scale ideally will
be larger than if the data resolution is less.
At times the page format is specified and the map must fit within its confines. If
the area is large, the cartographer has few options other than including larger scale
insets to show the details of some areas.
A common problem is using a map that was designed for a different scale. This
problem frequently occurs in newspapers, periodicals, and websites when a map pub-
lished by an agency or individual for use at one size is reduced to fit the column inches
available (see Figure 5.4). Much information is lost through this reduction. Ideally,
the map should be redrawn to fit the format, but time constraints may dictate that
the original be used. In such cases, the source should be cited so the reader can go to
the original.
As we will see, map scale is an important factor in choosing the amount of gen-
eralization that will be used on a map.
Miles
0
200
400
fIgURe 5.3.
The graphic scale should not be more precise than the map. Detail on this map
cannot be read at 10-mile increments.
78 THe geOgRaPHiC anD CaRTOgRaPHiC FRaMeWORK
