No subject

[News Account]

Newsgroups: info.grass.user
Path: ront
From: ront at picea.CFNR.ColoState.EDU (Ronald Thomas)
Subject: Re: GRASS cannot be used by the U.S. Forest Service?
Sender: news at yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU (News Account)
Message-ID: <Cqqtuu.1IM3 at yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 00:11:18 GMT
References: <01HCYN4V33OY0007QF at PLAINS.UWYO.EDU>
Nntp-Posting-Host: niwot.cnr.colostate.edu
Organization: College of Natural Resources, Colo. State Univ.
Lines: 49

In article <01HCYN4V33OY0007QF at PLAINS.UWYO.EDU> you write:
>
>I find it hard to accept that our government will not accept free
>software needed to accomplish their mission, but I'm sure there
>are legal uncertainties.
>
>I have two questions.  First, are there people out there in U.S.
>Forest Service offices who are openly using GRASS?  Second, is
>this a legitimate concern on the part of the Forest Service?
>
>It seems shortsighted to me that skilled people in the Forest
>Service may be discouraged from using much of the free and quite
>useful software available on the net!
>
>	Bill Baker
>	bakerwl at uwyo.edu

Just my two cents worth -- "free" ?  What of the cost of having someone 
compile and maintain the software.  What about training and its costs?
What of the time (cost) of converting ARC/INFO data to GRASS format?  What
about the cost of new computers -- most districts are on the DG (Data General)
system, which is not even PC-based, but a dedicated server/slave terminal
configuration that is proprietary.

True, the USFS regional office (Lakewood) and Arapahoe/Roosevelt Nat.
Forest (Ft. Collins) have HP workstations and qualified people.

The taxpayers (and me) are fed up with government waste, and having duplicate
GIS systems (after choosing a good, albeit expensive one) can be seen as a
luxury ala Rosty.

I would suppose (my guess, not first-hand knowledge, by any means) that 
the DATABASE integration sold ARC to the USFS, (unless they got a good price,
like DOI agencies did under the GIS II contract.).

We will be installing ARC soon, and converting our database to ARC format, and
adding MUCH to it because of the database abilities (using straight INFO, not
another third-party database).  We will keep our GRASS database and software 
for the time being, so that we will still have a functioning GIS during the 
transition and learning curve phase of this operation.  After that, I do
not know if I can justify the updating/maintaining of a GRASS database just
for the sake of having it available.

My opinions, not that of ......

Ronald Thomas                                ront at meeker.cfnr.colostate.edu
 Natural Resource Spec. (GIS)         ^^^    Phone: 303-586-1285
  Resources Management Division  ^^  ^^^^^   FAX: 303-586-1310
   Rocky Mountain National Park ^^^ ^^^^^^^  Estes Park, CO  80517