I have a fair number of maps from the British Geological Survey's 1:50000 and
1:63360 map series and very useful I find them. When you open them up not only
do you get a geological map of the area but usually a cross-section or two, and
very often notes and diagrams on the stratigraphy, gravity and magnetic
anomalies with perhaps some sub-drift topography or glacial meltwater drainage
maps thrown in too.

That's all very well and good but it is all too easy to be lured into playing
with language when turning to deficiencies in the map diagrams on the covers.
For instance, 'fossilised' is a word that comes to mind. Map covers of a certain
age - and including a very large number currently on sale - have an outline of
England and Wales which bears a modest resemblance to the current coast but
departs from it radically in some areas. The map appears to have been drawn
freehand with huge liberties taken with areas such as Pembrokeshire, Furness,
Wirral and South Devon to name but a few. How on earth did such a poor job get
through the checking procedures? And why does the BGS persist in selling maps
in these faulty covers? (to answer my own question: I presume it would be too
expensive to replace them) I raised the matter with BGS a few years ago but got
no response at the time. If any BGS folk read this - perhaps you can tell us.
This example of poor cartography confers no favours on the material inside the
covers to which great attention would appear to have been paid.

Older covers have much superior sheet diagrams and perhaps the new ones do too
(I have none of the picture cover maps in my collection as yet). If rectifying
the coastal outline it would be worth showing too which coastal sheets are in
practice combined into one map - these amendments might even improve sales and
help keep the costs down for us poor punters.

regards

Alan Bowring
Middlewich


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]