APPENDIX B

SAMPLING AND GENERAL RESULTS

(Tables 113)



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 45
Geologic Mapping: Future Needs APPENDIX B SAMPLING AND GENERAL RESULTS (Tables 1–13)

OCR for page 45
Geologic Mapping: Future Needs TABLE 1 Distribution of Questionnaires Mailed and Returned Listed by Professional Association Association Members in Polled Pool Number Mailed Respondents Nonrespondents Relevant Not Relevanta Otherb Undelivered No Response AAPG 24,133 802 297 (37) 18 (2) 13 (2) 80 (10) 390 (49) AEG 2,233 71 41 (58) 1 (1) 4 (6) 2 (3) 23 (33) AICP 4,667 129 30 (24) 5 (4) 4 (3) 6 (5) 83 (64) AWRA 1,933 57 22 (39) 2 (3) 1 (1) 2 (3) 30 (53) GSA 9,800 264 158 (56) 7 (3) 12 (4) 11 (4) 87 (33) SEXG 10,500 343 100 (32) 26 (8) 3 (1) 30 (9) 173 (50) SEG 1,700 52 24 (50) 2 (4) 1 (1) 7 (13) 16 (31) SEPM 3,967 148 64 (45) 6 (4) 1 (1) 32 (22) 43 (29) SME (AIME) 19,000 658 131 (20) 26 (4) 25 (4) 86 (13) 388 (59) TOTAL 77,933 2,524 857 93 64 256 1,233 NOTE: Percentages (in parentheses) for each cagegory of mailed out questionnaires a Respondents returning questionnaire with comment that information requested is not relevant to their work. b Category includes following reasons stated by respondents for not completing questionnaire: Did not complete; Unable to complete; Too busy to complete; Retired; Sabbatical; No longer with company; Unemployed; Illness; Deceased.

OCR for page 45
Geologic Mapping: Future Needs TABLE 2 Distribution of Respondents by State Alabama 8 Louisiana 47 Ohio 14 Alaska 11 Maine 2 Oklahoma 57 Arizona 25 Maryland 6 Oregon 8 Arkansas 5 Massachusetts 15 Pennsylvania 31 California 125 Michigan 12 Rhode Island 1 Colorado 152 Minnesota 9 South Carolina 4 Connecticut 4 Mississippi 11 South Dakota 2 Delaware 3 Missouri 9 Tennessee 10 Florida 18 Montana 9 Texas 220 Georgia 12 Nebraska 1 Utah 32 Hawaii 3 Nevada 16 Vermont 2 Idaho 10 New Hampshire 0 Virginia 27 Illinois 17 New Jersey 7 Washington 16 Indiana 8 New Mexico 24 West Virginia 5 Iowa 1 New York 22 Wisconsin 9 Kansas 7 North Carolina 5 Wyoming 20 Kentucky 10 North Dakota 5             Total Response 1077 TABLE 3 Respondents by Category of Employment Category Respondents Individual Response Response for Organization Organization Map Users Total Map Use Academic 158 101 57 1,143 1,244 Private industry 592 211 380 7,787 7,999 Consulting 211 92 119 753 845 Local government 31 13 18 87 100 State government 45 10 34 367 377 Federal government 121 78 43 1,085 1,163 Other 55 17 38 527 544 TOTAL 1,213 523 689 11,749 12,272 TABLE 4 Activities Respondents Consider “Extremely Important” to Their Work   Category of Employment Work Activity Academic Government Industry Other Total Resource planning 20 (8) 56 (17) 167 (11) 10 (22) 253 Resource exploration 41 (16) 53 (16) 584 (39) 5 (11) 683 Resource development 13 (5) 37 (11) 382 (26) 5 (11) 437 Scientific research 123 (48) 72 (22) 122 (8) 5 (11) 322 Engineering 13 (5) 50 (15) 138 (9) 11 (25) 212 Hazard mitigation 12 (5) 54 (16) 76 (5) 8 (18) 150 Other 32 (13) 8 (3) 22 (2) 1 (2) 63 TOTAL 254 330 1491 45 2120 NOTE: Number of respondents followed by percentage (in parentheses).

OCR for page 45
Geologic Mapping: Future Needs TABLE 5 Percentage of Categories of Employment Performing Each Work Activity Work Activity Academic Government Industry Other Resource planning 8 22 66 4 Resource exploration 6 8 85 1 Resource development 3 9 87 1 Scientific research 38 22 38 1 Engineering 6 24 65 5 Hazard mitigation 8 36 51 5 Other 50 13 35 2 TABLE 6 Responses to Question 4 Showing Estimated Number of Maps Used per Year Number of Maps Number of Respondents Blank 202 (19) 1–9 101 (9) 10–49 284 (26) 50–99 136 (13) 100–499 298 (27) >500 54 (5) >1000 10 (1) TOTAL 1085 NOTE: Percent of respondents shown in parentheses.

OCR for page 45
Geologic Mapping: Future Needs TABLE 7a Map Usage (Number per Year) by Category of Work Category 0 0–9 10–49 50–99 100–499 500–999 >1000 Academic 25 12 57 22 36 8 1 Industry 116 65 128 67 181 42 6 Consultant 39 14 51 43 63 4 0 Local government 8 6 8 2 7 0 0 State government 11 5 5 7 10 2 1 Federal government 14 6 52 10 38 1 2 Other 10 6 21 5 11 3 0 TABLE 7b Map Usage (Number per Year) by Work Activity CATEGORY 0 0–9 10–49 50–99 100–499 500–999 >1000 Resource planning 25 15 62 30 69 20 3 Resourse exploration 111 50 169 89 217 41 8 Resource development 78 31 94 59 139 33 6 Scientific research 51 24 97 36 94 17 3 Engineering 43 22 53 83 51 10 2 Hazard mitigation 23 13 43 23 43 6 0 Other 9 6 17 9 17 4 1 TABLE 8 Source of Geoscience Maps Used by Categories   Category of Employment Work Activity Academic Government Industry Other Total Federal agency 136 (40) 141 (40) 419 (27) 18 (32) 714 State agency 80 (24) 80 (23) 281 (18) 12 (22) 453 Local agency 8 (2) 11 (3) 63 (4) 7 (13) 89 Academia 48 (14) 23 (7) 74 (5) 1 (2) 146 Self-produced 54 (16) 84 (24) 584 (38) 12 (22) 734 Other 15 (4) 11 (3) 117 (8) 5 (9) 148 TOTAL 341 350 1,538 55 2,284 NOTE: Number of respondents followed by percentage (in parentheses).

OCR for page 45
Geologic Mapping: Future Needs TABLE 9 Number and Percentage of Responses Indicating Printing Styles Favored for Different Geoscience Map Types Style Geologic Geophysical Groundwater Total Full Color 651 (52) 137 (19) 87 (25) 875 One Color 226 (18) 154 (21) 103 (29) 483 Black & White 381 (30) 431 (60) 160 (46) 972 TOTAL 1258 722 350 2330 NOTE: Percentage shown (in parentheses) is percentage of each style for the map type indicated. TABLE 10 Number and Percentage (in parentheses) of Responses Indicating Bases Considered “Extremely Important” for Three Geoscience Map Types Base Map Geologic Geophysical Groundwater Total Topographic 827 (35) 459 (35) 278 (30) 1564 Land net 379 (16) 268 (21) 114 (12) 761 Culture 216 (9) 154 (12) 109 (12) 479 Drainage 422 (18) 188 (14) 255 (28) 865 Orthophoto 125 (5) 52 (4) 38 (4) 215 Orthophoto quad 140 (6) 63 (5) 44 (5) 247 Composite 248 (10) 112 (9) 74 (8) 434 TABLE 11 Relative Importance of Different Scales for Three Types of Geoscience Maps with Percentages of Scale Category for Each Map Type Scale Geologic Geophysical Groundwater Total Large 766 (40) 481 (41) 221 (57) 1468 (43) Medium 533 (28) 312 (27) 43 (11) 888 (26) Small 290 (15) 185 (16) 123 (32) 598 (17) Regional 306 (16) 192 (16) 0 (0) 498 (14) TOTAL 1895 1170 387 3452 NOTE: Large is less than 1:24:000; medium is 1:24,000 to 1:62,500; small is 1:100,000 to 1:250,000; regional is greater than 1:250,000.

OCR for page 45
Geologic Mapping: Future Needs TABLE 12 Relative Importance of Different Scales for Three Types of Geoscience Maps with Percentages of Scale Category for Each Map Type Scale Geologic Geophysical Groundwater Large 52 33 15 Medium 60 35 5 Small 48 31 21 Regional 61 39 0 NOTE: Large is less than 1:24:000; medium is 1:24,000 to 1:62,500; small is 1:100,000 to 1:250,000; regional is greater than 1:250,000. TABLE 13 Number of Responses and Percentages (in parentheses) Indicating Importance Accorded Different Self -Produced Map Types by Organizational Groups Map Type Academic Government Industry Other Responses Geologic 102 (39) 86 (31) 603 (37) 13 (28) 804 Geophysical 40 (15) 33 (12) 404 (25) 10 (22) 487 Geochemical 17 (6) 26 (10) 149 (9) 2 (4) 194 Metallogenic 9 (3) 13 (5) 67 (4) 0 (0) 89 Derivative geologic 37 (14) 40 (15) 244 (15) 3 (7) 324 Groundwater 27 (10) 42 (15) 92 (6) 6 (13) 167 Derivative land use 19 (7) 27 (10) 66 (4) 10 (22) 122 Other 12 (5) 7 (3) 22 (1) 2 (2) 43

OCR for page 45
Geologic Mapping: Future Needs This page intentionally left blank.