i don't have a gps system. i am not keen on how they compartmentalise the world into digestible parts. using an early version of it - the london a-z - i had a distorted idea of the city. camberwell to peckham were close by as turning the page i would go from one to the other. camberwell to dulwich seemed to be quite a distance as i would have to go through dozens of pages. moving east west was fine. north south however made no sense in relation to the proximity of areas. gps seems to mimic this method aiding in the local but sorely lacking in context of the global.
on the wanders i use maps, there is a north american road atlas with maps of the provinces/states that i pick up at the various tourist boards - well except, the nation of québec, alberta, and b.c. cheap bastards they charge. the provincial maps, allow me enough detail to see where i am coupled with my placement within the province and a relative distance between localities. i also try to mark them with the locations of where snaps were made for future reference. this tends to be less than rigourous when the urge to make time takes over. i think that i can remember the days delays when i stop for the evening. it works for populated areas but on this wander there will be a quite a few vague locations as there are no references in the snaps and i didn't actually mark the map. the road atlas works to place me in the whole trip.
this time, however, with the wander north of 60 a rushed and poorly planned affair, i didn't didn't have that map of the over view. if i had i probably wouldn't have been as cavalier about my goals.
i had with me what i always have when i travel. the same road atlas, the new maps, but i found that the further north i went, the less useful the road atlas was, it seems that atlases made in the states think that it is not necessary to show areas where roads are relatively scarce. maps of the western provinces seemed to end well before the 60th parallel. alberta has an inset for fort mcmurray for example. the page for bc ends at dawson creek. the map was only useful for about 20km. looking at my venerable aaa road atlas of north america i would have thought that entering bc there would only be a short hike to the yukon. the free map of the alaskan highway shed some light on my mistake but i only realised what i had done when i returned developed the film and was trying to catalogue the rolls looking at a map of canada.
one would think that the time i drove would have given me some hints but i am used to longish outings. i was somewhat aware of the task as i did worry about the roads and the availability of gasbars once i entered bc. what i had failed to comprehend was how far north i was and how much more "north" there was. the google maps depiction seemed more a western than a northern direction. not placing the route and destination in the grander scheme of the continent, i didn't realise how close to the arctic circle i was nor how - relatively - close i was to seeing the northwest territories, on the more local maps the distances spoke hours seeing the wander as a whole they were side trips. i saw the klondike as an equal to l'anse aux meadows not nearly correct, i was incorrect in other comparisons to the rock in the opposite sense. comparing the bay d'espoir highway with the dempster, the liard or the campbell.
i also thought that this would be a one off type of wander. looking at maps i am ready to head back using even more northerly roads.
seeing the snaps made, trying to pinpoint where they were made on the maps, has turned this one off type of wander into one where i want to return this time trying to use even more northerly roads.
