Historical Topographic Maps - Preserving the Past

I have approximately 50 old quad sheets from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. I have given away several of them to surveyors with the understanding that they be preserved somehow. My favorite (and one I want to somehow mount) is of the area now in the Smoky Mountain Naational Park before it became a National Park.

Andy

Glad to hear that USGS is preserving them. I recently lamented that quad maps, which I consider to be a work of art, are not being updated as far as I know.

Here is something that might be of interest:

Prior to NAD1927, the datum in use in the US was the North American Datum, also called the US Standard Datum. The coordinates of the origin at MEADES RANCH (in Kansas) are the same in both datums, however the azimuth to WALDO is nearly 5" different.

The City of Pittsburgh coordinate system, for example, is based on NAD. The difference in western PA between NAD27 and NAD is significant, something like 100 feet if I recall correctly. I had a post-it note with the shift, but I cannot find it right now.

Anyway, the new NGS data sheet format will include NAD coordinates IF a station had them (i.e. on old stations that were positioned prior to NAD27). So, these coordinates can be used to compute a local transformation so that the sheets can be properly georeferenced.

It was kind of funny that when I went to the site that Massachusetts was not represented, and I knew that I've seen the old topo's previously!

The Univ. of New Hampshire also has archived old USGS maps, at least the ones for new England!

Old Topos New England

Dtp

"Glad to hear that USGS is preserving them. I recently lamented that quad maps, which I consider to be a work of art, are not being updated as far as I know."

Joe, I'm glad you feel this way. They are indeed works of art and are hand crafted. I know, because the first seven years of my mapping career was spent as a cartographic drafter with the U. S. Army and several other government agencies engraving quad maps. Made MANY of South East Asia, the Middle East and a couple stateside.
The transition to computers was a good thing and if tha Army had done the conversion correctly, today's maps could look the same and be of the same quality as in the past. Problem is that when the Corps wrote the new drafting standards it is obvious that not one person on that committee had ever even seen a mapping unit. The symbology for all of the mapping symbols was already there in the technical manuals, but these guiys did not even know that those books existed.
They did not follow the mapping knowledge that they did have. Example, I assume there were some officers on that committee. It's a little know fact that to pass OCS the candidates MUST pass the map reading class. One of the questions on that test is "Name the types of contours". The correct answer is "Index and Intermediate", yet the NEW specs come up with "Major and Minor". If you do not know the proper nomenclature, you do not know the subject.
Thus the Corps now produces drawings that look like they were done by second graders with crayons. It's a government wide thing driven by the computer guys. Another example, look at the "improvements" in the flood maps. Most are unreadable because they are not set up correctly.
It saddens my heart to watch my CRAFT deteriorate so badly just because of the ignorance of those setting up the "standards".