[appgema] AppGeMa Digest, Vol 2, Issue 1

[sparry at cedd.gov.hk]

Dear All

Prof Brunsden has raised some very pertinent points, which I fully support. Much of the tasks
envisaged under Goal 2 have been carried out previously and it would appear this (rather than
Goal 1 suggested by Paolo) could be dropped.

I have not read Gustavvson et al. (2006) so I am not sure of their division between  “detailed
geomorphological mapping” and “theme and applications”. However, from a personal viewpoint as
an engineering geologist, I consider that geomorphological mapping is neither “time consuming
and costly”.

In Hong Kong it is becoming an increasing component of work from a landslide hazard viewpoint.
However one problem is that many geologists do not have sufficient geomorphological training
and experience and consequently the resulting maps are often poorly focused. As a result
geomorphological maps are not used as extensively as they should be. Therefore I agree it is
important we involve engineering geologists through the IAEG, AEG & Engineering Group of the
Geol Soc of London, as there is much we can learn from each other.

The idea is a digital atlas is supported, as it should provide an easy accessible source to
demonstrate the power of geomorphological mapping when used correctly.

As regards funding perhaps consideration should be given to approaching the major oil companies
given the considerable input from geomorphology to pipeline route selection?


Regards

Steve Parry





appgema-request at lists.eogeo.org wrote:

> Send AppGeMa mailing list submissions to
>         appgema at lists.eogeo.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/appgema
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         appgema-request at lists.eogeo.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         appgema-owner at lists.eogeo.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of AppGeMa digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. WG activity (Paolo Paron)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 08:35:14 -0000
> From: "Paolo Paron" <paoloparon at yahoo.it>
> Subject: [appgema] WG activity
> To: <appgema at lists.eogeo.org>
> Cc: Richard Dikau <rdikau at giub.uni-bonn.de>,    Jan-Christoph Otto
>         <j.otto at geographie.uni-bonn.de>,        Jan Moeyersons - AfricaMuseum
>         <jan.moeyersons at africamuseum.be>,       Lars Brabyn <LARSB at waikato.ac.nz>,
>         Marcus Gustavsson <Marcus.Gustavsson at geo.uu.se>,        Sebe Krisztina
>         <sebekrisztina at mecsekerc.hu>,   'Edgardo Latrubesse'
>         <latrubesse at igs.edu.ar>,        Leandro D'Alessandro
>         <leandrodalessandro at unich.it>,  Francesco Dramis <dramis at uniroma3.it>
> Message-ID: <20061114231259.40E142EC04C at lists.eogeo.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
>
> Dear Colleagues,
>
>
>
> the WG have reached the number of 43 members, spread over 19 countries, as
> you can see form the attached map, and I would like to thank all the ones
> who expressed their interest in this initiative.
>
> It has been a real pleasure to welcome Professors Denys Brunsden, Herman T.
> Verstappen, Richard Dikau, Bernhard Eitel, Jim Griffiths, among the others.
>
>
>
> There are two different issues that I would like to share with you: one
> regarding the questionnaire and other institutional issues, and the other
> more relate do the activities and funding/sponsorhips of the WG
>
>
>
> 1) Questionnaire & institutional issues
>
>
>
> a) Questionnaire. So far there has been only a little response to the
> questionnaire that you can find on the right-hand side of the WG web page
> (http://www.geomorph.org/wg/wgagm.html). I guess if this is due to the fact
> that most of you agree with the expected activities and outputs or not.
>
> Among the feedbacks one, in particular (by Denys Brunsden), regards the
> activities of the WG and it will be discussed later.
>
> Another feedback (by Jim McCalpin) strongly suggest to contact the
> "International Association for Engineering Geology, which has a Commission
> (Commision 1) on a very similar topic, that of Engineering Geological maps.
> See http://www.iaeg.info/Default.aspx?tabid=74." This is also important,
> according to McCalpin, because "In the USA, most "applied geomorphological
> mapping" is performed by consulting engineering geologists as a part of the
> services they offer clients. It is NOT generally performed by academics at
> universities. Because of that, the Association of Engineering Geologists (
> <http://www.aegweb.org/> www.aegweb.org ), would be the key USA organization
> to consult with.".
>
> This is a good suggestion and it goes in the same direction of another one
> (Denys Brunsden) that points out the work done by the Engineering Specialty
> Group of the Geological Society of London.
>
>
>
> b) Vice-Chair. There has been only one candidature for the vice-chair
> position so far: Dr. Mike Smith, from Kingston University, London.
>
> I guess that, if there will be no other expressions of interest for this
> position in the next week (ending Tuesday the 21th) we can welcome Dr Smith
> as vice-chair.
>
>
>
>
>
> 2) Activities of the WG
>
>
>
> a) Main goals. the only feedback that has been sent (from Prof. Brunsden)
> has some very wise suggestions on the goals and general activities of the
> WG. From his historical perspective Prof. Brunsden considers that "During
> the 1960's, indeed starting earlier, there was a huge interest in
> geomorphological mapping and numerous national systems were developed. All
> the arguments, discussions about the best symbols, classifications etc were
> endlessly given. The journals are packed with, I suspect, everything you
> want to know. The first task, therefore, is to do a thorough literature
> search and to ask people to empty there files. You will have more papers
> than you have yet read.
>
> ...
>
> Don't waste your time doing it all again. Trust the people of the past -
> they were good and have done a lot for you.
>
> Of course it is possible to look at all the legends and to develop an agreed
> scheme for modern use. It is a mammoth task to gather it all together but
> believe me - all the discussions have already been held and went so far as
> the become intellectually sterile and very very boring.
>
> ...
>
> The main task is to make it compatible with modern GIS, ARC Info, Map Info
> or other systems
>
> Another task is to make it compatible with new imaging systems-Digital
> camera, LIDAR, etc"
>
>
>
> All these arguments go in the same directions of the ones expressed also by
> Gustavvson et al (2006) where they consider that "Activities focusing on
> geomorphological mapping as a scientific discipline in its own right have
> been relatively modest over the last 20 years. There may be two main reasons
> for this: (1) detailed  geomorphological mapping is a time-consuming and
> costly activity; and (2) the present focus is on themes and applications
> rather than the holistic scientific maps. As a consequence, instead of a
> general understanding of an area with its mutual spatial, chronological and
> genetic relations between land elements (sensu Lawrance, 1972, cited in
> Cooke and Doornkamp, 1990, p. 21, Fig. 2.1; see also Speight, 1974), the
> discipline has come to be seen as fossil and not real science and now stands
> in the shadow of thematic and applied maps and technical developments
> focusing on specific problems. This is somewhat surprising especially
> because the decline in geomorphological mapping coincides with a strong
> development in GIS; yet the new possibilities that can spring from a
> combination of a GIS database and traditional field based geomorphological
> maps and legends have been somewhat neglected." (Geomorphology, 77: 90-111).
>
>
>
> And they also go in the same direction of the general objectives and outputs
> proposed for the WG.
>
>
>
> According to these considerations, the only point that could be amended from
> the Main Goals of the WG is the first one: Develop and deepen the
> theoretical basis of applied geomorphological mapping. We are still in a
> sort of preliminary phase of the WG and we could drop this point, according
> to the historical perspective explained above.
>
> What do you think about this possibility?
>
>
>
> b) Literature search and collection. The first step to follow is, in any
> case, to do the deep literature search and to collect the material published
> so far. In order to make this collection already a step toward a useful
> product for the community of users, one idea is to produce a DVD that could
> contain a sort of "Digital Atlas of applied geomorphological maps", edited
> by the experts in this field. The main task to perform, in this case, would
> be to translate into English the legends and the notes of the maps published
> in languages different than English, in order to let everybody understand
> their symbolism and comments. In this way we could already think of a
> product that could be: i) used as it is by the both researchers and the
> professionals, ii) constitute the base upon which built the new standards
> and GIS legend systems, and iii) accomplish with the points number 2 and
> partly 1 of the WG. We could also think of adding to the Digital Atlas the
> principal and most important papers, book chapters, grey literature and
> other material on Applied geomorphological mapping.
>
> A very good achievement would be the translation of the collected material
> also in French and Spanish, allowing thus most of the colleagues from
> non-english speaking countries to profit form it.
>
> What do you think about this option?
>
>
>
> c) Subgroups. Regarding the objectives and outputs my suggestion is to focus
> on the two main groups of mapping types where geomorphology plays a key
> role: geomorphological mapping sensu stricto, and land-system or terrain
> mapping (Cooke et al., 1983). Both of these types of mapping are used for
> applied geomorphological issues, with different aims, techniques, and
> scales. This could be easily done by two subgroups of the WG.
>
> What do you think about this option?
>
>
>
> d) Free-resources and open-source material. The web site of the WG could be
> a real useful resource site, hosting also a free resource section where we
> could put links to freeware or open-source software, toolkits, palette of
> symbols and colours, etc for mapping. To this regards if there is somebody
> willing to collect all these kind of resources from the other members she/he
> is very welcome.
>
> What do you think about this option? Is it there anybody interested in being
> the reference point for the collection of the material?
>
>
>
> e) Donors/Sponsors/Funding. As you all may know the activities developed by
> the WG are on a voluntary base and the WG has a funding for its development
> from the IAG/AIG of 500 ? per year, only. This is the reason why we are
> looking for sponsorship for the activities, especially if we would like to
> pursue the objective of the Summer School and also of some of the other
> activities/outputs. This is a kind invitation to all of you to think about
> and suggest to the group a possible sponsor of the WG.
>
>
>
>
>
> There are still some members who do not have subscribed to the mailing list.
> Please do subscribe if you can (just send an email to
> appgema at lists.eogeo.org). It would be much more easy to communicate if
> everybody could subscribe to the mailing list.
>
>
>
>
>
> Please do not hesitate to post a reply to this message directly on the
> mailing list ( <mailto:appgema at lists-eogeo.org> appgema at lists-eogeo.org ).
> It would be extremely important to have a feedback from you at least on the
> questions that are underlined.
>
> In order to allow everybody to see the reply, please simply do a "reply to
> all" to this message.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Paolo
>
>
>
> :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:
> Paolo PARON
>
> email:  <mailto:paoloparon at yahoo.it> paoloparon at yahoo.it
> mobile (untill the 20th of November): +61 435 088 426
>
> POBox 8 - Sarit Centre
> 00606 Nairobi - Kenya
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.eogeo.org/pipermail/appgema/attachments/20061115/bd531fe0/attachment.htm
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: Directory MAP_nov06.jpg
> Type: image/jpeg
> Size: 1041895 bytes
> Desc: not available
> Url : http://lists.eogeo.org/pipermail/appgema/attachments/20061115/bd531fe0/attachment.jpg
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> AppGeMa mailing list
> AppGeMa at lists.eogeo.org
> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/appgema
>
> End of AppGeMa Digest, Vol 2, Issue 1
> *************************************