Lab 7: Mapping Census 2000

In this map, I used census data from 2000 to display the number of people per county. I used a North American Conformal Conic map projection and graduated purple color ramp to show the number of people in the United States as of the census of 2000. From this map we can tell that there are not as many people per county throughout the Midwest. Most of the Midwest such as Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, North and South Dakota usually have less than 25,000 people per county. Much of the 25,000-500,000 number of people per county are located elsewhere and around big cities in the U.S. Although some Midwest and central regions can also have large numbers of people, the highest numbers are mostly concentrated in the west and east coasts. Clusters of counties with the highest numbers of people are considerably dominant in Southern California  and the East coasts states such as Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York and the Northeast Metropolitan Region. 

This map showed the difference between the number of people per county from the 1990 census to the 2000 census. This map also was in the North American Lambert Conformal Conic Projection. The colors chosen for this map make it easy to understand, because the pink values show the greatest disparity of people per county. These pink counties have a negative value and this occurs mostly in the Midwest and scattered elsewhere throughout the U.S. The light green values show that the number of people per county has stayed or roughly the same on increased slightly. However, we can see great increases in the number of people over the decade in Southern California, Arizona, Florida, and the coastal regions of the East and Washington State. 

The percent change of the total population from 1990 to 2000 is different compared to the quantitative number of people map. This map, in North American Conformal Conic Projection demonstrates negative values in the Midwest, so there is a great percentage decrease in counties located there, especially in North Dakota. Much of the rest of the country seems to have very little percentage change in total population, except for a large part of Nevada and small counties throughout the U.S. 

My last and final map shows the population density as of 2000. Areas with little population are mostly located on the mid-west part of the United States. Even then, very few counties have less than a population density of 1. Many more counties with a population density less than 7 still continue in the midwest states of Nevada, Colorado, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Idaho, and New Mexico. We can clearly see the great difference in the western and eastern United States. The eastern united states has many more counties with a population density ranging from 7 to 80. The most dense areas are definitely located on the eastern seaboard, Southern California, Florida, and places near bodies of water such as the great lake states, Washington, and the Bay Area. 

My census map series was a lot easier to do once I clearly understood the directions. I got confused following the lab instructions, but was able to make all four maps easy to read. I tried to make my maps neat, organized, aligned, and with symbols, neatlines and legends that were useful for someone else to understand. My overall impressions of GIS are that it is very useful for a variety of disciplines and uses.  I have enjoyed using this program so far and I am planning on working on my own GIS projects using my trial software during winter break. I plan to minor in GIS and am sure it will be advantageous for my future career.

Lab 6: DEMs in ArcGIS

DEMs in ArcGIS

 

The area that I selected for my four different maps of a DEM that was located near L.A. It was an area of digital elevation model ned_99839875. The extent on top was 39.8291666661 and on the bottom it was 39.3838888883 and left it was -105.788888889  and right it was  -104.969444445. The geographic coordinate system of my original DEM was GCS North American 1983. I used this coordinate system to display all 4 maps. 

Lab 5: Map Projection in ArcGIS

Equal Area Maps

1) Cylindrical Equal Area projection; distance: 10,011 mi

2) Berhmann projection; distance: 8683 mi

 

Equidistant Maps

(1) Equidistant conic projection; distance:7017 mi

2) Equidistant cylindrical projection; distance: 5066 mi

Conformal Maps

1) Mercator projection; distance: 9912 mi

2) Stereographic projection; distance: 10,068 mi

The significance of map projections can clearly be seen with the wide variety of options shown above. While trying to convey several aspects of maps that are conformal, equidistant and equal area, their projections are often very different from each other. They are significant because they can distort distance, shape, and size of land masses and oceans on the globe. For instance, if one uses a conformal projection such as the Mercator, land masses will not be true to their size. However, the projection might be useful for navigational purposes and to accurately depict shapes. Also, one might use an equal-area map to preserve area and the size of countries, in order for countries not to look like they are bigger than they really are. Others might use a conic equi-distant projection to preserve distance, which shows that these projections are the most true to distance between Kabul and Washington D.C.

                The perils of map projections are that instead of having one true map projection, in which size, shape and distance are preserved; they all have one of those elements missing. If one chose to use a Mercator projection, then the shapes of continents would be correct but the sizes of continents and distances between them would be very different. I would definitely not use this projection if I wanted to know the exact distance between two places. It might be easier for people to read maps if there was one common map projection, and not a variety to choose from.

I think the future of map projections will be crucial to serve different functions, occupations and uses. For instance, the conic equidistant map can display the spherical space of an area and zoom in on it.  An example would be showing Antarctica bigger than the rest of the globe. With the help of GIS, it can possibly display what we want know; such as how the ozone has depleted and thickened throughout several years with restrictions on CFC emissions. Different projections could help accurately preserve shape, size, or distance so people could discover things about earth and our climate. I think that map projections have the potential to grow and expand to different fields not just geography.

Just by conducting six different map projections, I was able to tell how different the world could look in other lenses. The properties of the projections, what they lack, and what elements they preserve can tell us a lot about how different disciplinaries use this to their advantage. These projections are used to showcase the element they want to be more precise and are able to in a variety of ways. 

Week 4: Introducing ArcMap

     I felt comfortable using ArcMap for this lab. I found that the ArcMap Tutorial made it very easy to navigate through the system. The tutorial gave step by step instructions of how to add layers to data frames and add other attributes to maps and tables. The fact that I had to do repeat some steps for different data frames helped me understand how to work with ArcMap myself without much tutorial help at the end. The things I had difficulty with were very minor,  but overall I think I understand this program well so far. It was interesting seeing how my maps came together at the end. I thought it was amazing to see how data can be so precise and display much more about regions than just physical characteristics.
     Some of the downfalls of ArcMap are that it is too precise for it to be too widely used and used by masses of people. If one misses a step or does not do it in order, it can alter the entire map. Also, it is very detailed so the person using it has to have clear knowledge of what they are doing. It is definitely not as user friendly as user-centric Google Maps, etc because the program  is not widely accessible or free. It is still prone to errors, but it's accuracy is increasing with better development of technology.
     The benefits of ArcMap far outweigh the pitfalls of it. There are many things one can do with ArcMap, such as show demographics, noise contour and other multi-disciplinary aspects. It helps companies, organizations, scientists, and engineers understand what they want to know about an area, demographics, and physical land. The great advantage of ArcMap is that if the data is accurate, then the maps will be very precise.
      I enjoyed using ArcMap because of the level of accuracy and if used right, how informative it can be about a variety of aspects, not just physical regions. This program is clear to understand and it is easy to change things. I think the more it is widely known, the better it will be for continued environmental and urban planning, as well as informing companies and organizations for better marketing and outreach.