I was totally into yesterday's NPR story
about a group of researchers in walking the route of a new road from a remote village to the big city of Iquitos. It was all rough terrain and jungle and the idea was to explore the impact of the road on deforestation and human health, including the spread of malaria. The one statement that stopped me dead:
Pan has brought the only maps they have — Google Earth photos from 2003.
Later researcher Pan notes:
"I learned that the parts of the road that look on the satellite image as cleared are actually not as cleared as it appears. And there's not as many communities as we had thought there might be."
I have what are perhaps naive questions. Surely there are newer images available? Why then are they using old images from four years ago? Is there no funding to acquire newer imagery? If there is no or little funding did the researchers at least ask for a break on price from commercial providers?
Those researchers probably spent their money on airfare, meals, and a cheap GPS or two, and cobbled together a map and a plan using freeware and Google.
This is one of the reasons why the benificent Googlers do what they do...to support free growth of good ideas.
Sure, you can get Landsat data for a few hundred bucks, but if there's free DigitalGlobe already there...why buy?
Naive? I would hope your questions were put as a disingenuous way to compel dialog?
But look at the composition of their team: two infectious-diseases experts, a physician who is also a “former ultimate Frisbee player” (real important skill set that they will need) and a biostatistician who is a “former head cheerleader” (another important skill set that they will need).
They are doing geographic research yet they don’t even include a geographer.
No wonder they are using Google Earth maps that are 4 plus years out of date. They probably thought, “Just go on the web. After all, it’s ‘JUST’ a picture of the earth.”
They probably didn’t even contact a geographer or geoscientist, who would know the importance of getting and using good imagery. Someone who would have/could have assisted them on getting good imagery.