Hey Jon:
Thanks for the information. I had a old Topo Map of the Patoka Lake area that was made before the lake was dammed up. I spliced several 7.5 quad paper maps together with scotch tape. I then traced a countour that matched the Patoka Lake summer pool level 536ft. It's falling apart as it got wet one day a long time ago.

The maps that I got from my friend are much more accurate. They are larger and more detailed. The problem with them is that they don't use a map coordinate system that is compatable with my hand held gps. I don't have access to a lap top.

Most of my spots (Waypoints) on my gps are areas that I found with my depth finder and marked while on the water. The best way to find a spot on the lake is to mark it on the GPS when you catch a fish.

I am worried that taking points off a paper map or even a digital copy of a paper map may not have the accuracy that I want. Which is why I am not moving very fast on my digital map.

As you may well know by now the digital maps have to be calibrated. Fugi and OziExplorer digital maps need to have three or more calibration points. The more points used in calibation the better the accuracy should be. So they say.

If you think about trying to find a brush pile in 30ft of water and your depth finder only can see a 10ft circular area of the bottom of the lake it would take a pretty accurate map to put you right over the brush pile or stump. Imagine trying to find a single stump on a break in 30ft of water.

Using the maps helps locate ledges and ditches etc. But it won't show you where the trees are lcoated or what the bottom hardness is like or where the bottom content changes.

Regards,

Moose1am